Global Competition Law is primarly a practitioner's guide presenting the most salient aspects of the major competition laws country by country, giving an overview of their structure and most charasteristic elements.
Global Competition Law also provides insight into possible future developments in the field.

Global Competition Law

Article 3 prohibits agreements, decisions and concerted practices that may distort competition. The Article contains a list of activities considered illegal under the Act, including price fixing, limiting production, dividing markets and tying. The Act also specifically prohibits group boycotts. In general only the specific provision of an agreement that offends the Act is prohibited and not the w …

The prohibition

Article 3 prohibits agreements, decisions and concerted practices that may distort competition. The Article contains a list of activities considered illegal under the Act, including price fixing, limiting production, dividing markets and tying. The Act also specifically prohibits group boycotts. In general only the specific provision of an agreement that offends the Act is prohibited and not the whole agreement, except where the clause cannot be severed from the rest of the contract. 

An amendment to the Competition Act of 1 September 2009 abolished Article 6 which contained a de minimis provision. Therefore, the rule is not explicit anymore, but remains effective (see the Notice of the Office for the Protection of Competition on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition). 

It is specified in the notice that the Office holds the view that agreements should not be prohibited pursuant to Article 3(1): if the aggregate market share held by the parties to the agreement does not exceed 10% on any of the relevant markets affected by the agreement (horizontal agreement); or if the market share held by each of the parties to the agreement does not exceed 15% on any of the relevant markets affected by the agreement (vertical agreement). 

In addition, the 2012 reform introduced a new paragraph 2 in Article 21 according to which the Office may, after a preliminary investigation of the case, decide not to initiate proceedings where there is no public interest to do so in the light of the practice's low level of detrimental effect on economic competition, taking account in particular of the nature of the conduct, its method of implementation, the importance of the market and the number of consumers affected. 

Pursuant to Article 3 (4) of the Competition Act, the prohibition does not apply to agreements, which concurrently:

- contribute to improving the production or distribution of goods or to promoting technical or economic progress while allowing consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit,

- do not impose on the undertakings restrictions which are not indispensable to the attainment of the objectives pursuant to letter a),

- do not afford the undertakings the possibility of eliminating competition in respect to a substantial part of the market of goods, the supply or purchase which constitutes the objective of the agreement.

Pursuant to Article 3(1), the prohibition on agreements, decisions and concerted practices that may distort competition ceases to apply if the Office for the Protection of Competition has granted an exemption by implementing regulation. Article 26(2) empowers the Office to do so. EU block exemptions apply directly in the Czech Republic even if trade between Member States is not affected. However, the Office may also grant block exemptions to other categories of agreements, provided it is proved that the distortion of competition to which the block exemption would lead is outweighed by benefits to other market participants, in particular consumers.

Article 26 also empowers the Office to withdraw (even with respect to a particular undertaking) - by decision or decree - the benefits of a general exemption, if an agreement no longer meets the conditions of exemption as laid down in Article 3(4).

Pursuant to Article 20a(1), by its decision, the Office may also withdraw the benefit of an EU block exemption from an individual undertaking if the agreements in a particular case have effects that are incompatible with Article 101(3) TFEU in the territory of the Czech Republic or in a part thereof, which has all the characteristics of a distinct geographic market.

Global Competition Law

143. The prohibition

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les notions juridiques connexes

143. The prohibition

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise