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 32 of the Act empowers the Office to impose on undertakings any remedy that is proportionate to the infringement and necessary to bring it to an effective end. The remedy can either be an obligation concerning the undertaking’s, an obligation to do something or to refrain from doing something, or it may concern a change in the undertaking’s structure.
The Office can impose several remedies …

Cease and desist orders

Article 32 of the Act empowers the Office to impose on undertakings any remedy that is proportionate to the infringement and necessary to bring it to an effective end. The remedy can either be an obligation concerning the undertaking’s, an obligation to do something or to refrain from doing something, or it may concern a change in the undertaking’s structure.

The Office can impose several remedies at the same time, according to the timeframe it decides.

The Office can decide to impose either a final or a penalty payment (Article 41). Fines can go up to 10% of the worldwide turnover of the undertaking, for each infringement. The same fine can further be pronounced if the undertaking fails to comply with the Office’s decision (Article 42.1). Likewise, the Act now allows the Office to sentence an association of undertakings for the infringement caused by its members to a fine up to 10% of the sum of the turnover of all its members active in the market affected by the infringement, it being specified that the financial liability of each member may not exceed 10% of its turnover (Article 43).

The amount of the fine takes into account the duration and gravity of the infringement through the nature and impact on the market, the size of the market, as well as the existence of repeated infringement, the leading position of the undertaking, the refusal to cooperate (Article 42.3). To provide further guidance, the Office has issued Guidelines on the procedure for determining fines in cases of abuses of dominance and agreements restricting competition, effective from 1 September 2018.

Fines up to 1% of its turnover may also be imposed if an undertaking fails to fulfill the obligation to submit the requested documents or information to the Antimonopoly Office within the specified time-limit, or submits false or incomplete documents (Article 44). If the Office opts to do so, it can impose a penalty up to 5% of the average daily worldwide turnover so as to ensure compliance with any decision of the office (Article 46.1).

Fines

Article 51 of the Act governs the leniency program before the Antimonopoly Office. Any applicant for leniency must fulfill the following conditions :

- it must end its involvment in an agreement restricting competition at the latest immediately following its application, unless the Office grants a derogation to preserve the effectiveness of the investigation into the cartel ;

- it must not have coerced any undertaking into getting in the agreement restricting competition (this condition doesn’t apply for partial leniency) ;

- it must fully cooperate and provide the office with all evidence available without undue delay and until the end of proceedings ;

- it must not disclose its intention to apply for leniency nor its actual submission of application until the statement of objection is issued by the Office.

Full immunity is granted to the first undertaking involved in an agreement restricting competition to have, on its own initiative, provided the Office with either decisive evidence of the cartel or information crucial to carrying out an inspection to obtain such decisive evidence. Partial immunity – amounting to reducing the fine by up to 50% – is granted to the undertaking providing the Office with evidence with significant added value.

Detailed rules on submitting applications for the leniency program, applications for reservation of marker, particulars of these applications and the procedure followed by the Office may be found in Leniency Decree No 172/2014 and in the Office’s Guidelines on the Application of the Leniency Programme.

A whistleblower procedure for individuals was introduced in national law in 2014. To date, Article 54 of the Competition Act defines a whistleblower as a natural person that was the first to deliver information to the Office regarding a cartel between competitors. Such information must be decisive evidence to establish the cartel or to justify inspections that will provide such decisive evidence. The reward for providence such information is set at 1% of the sume of the fines imposed on all parties to the cartel in the Office’s decision, while being capped at 100 000 euros. It is not automatic and the whistleblower must introduce a request before the Office. Likewise, the reward is granted on express decision from the Office.

Global Competition Law

640. Cease and desist orders

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

Les notions juridiques connexes

640. Cease and desist orders

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