| |
Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic Annual Report 2001
6
Most of the cases recently investigated by the Office have been connected with the assessment of
vertical agreements, which are less dangerous from the competition view and they contribute to the
improvement of production, distribution of products, economic development etc. very often. On the
other hand, significant part of these agreements have also the anti-competitive effects resulting either
in production restriction, in division of supply resources or in other restriction.
From this reason they are subject to control by the Office. The undertaking, concluding an agreement
is justified to submit an incentive to the Office to issue a decision on negative clearance, declaring that
his business activity and conduct is not an agreement restricting competition or is subject to the rule de
minimis. He may also ask for so called individual exception, it means to submit an incentive to issue a
decision declaring that the subjected agreement restricting competition is exempted from the ban for
the certain period of time, as the agreement meets the certain conditions defined by the act. As the
Office received information on existence of vertical agreements directly from the undertakings, which
submitted such agreements to the Office within the request on individual exception or negative
clearance, it could also serve as a reason why the Office has been prevailingly dealing with vertical
agreements.
In 2001 the Office assessed 39 cases of agreements restricting competition, a majority of which (31
cases) was assessed based on a notification related to a request for a negative clearance or an
individual exemption. Having issued 24 decisions, in 8 cases the Office imposed a fine to parties of the
agreement. Chemical and food-processing industries were the sectors with the highest number of
notified agreements in 2001.
Distribution contracts (OMV Slovensko and FREYTAG-BERNDT
The Office imposed a fine in the amount of SKK 8 million (183 908 EUR) to the undertaking OMV
Slovensko for concluding a contract on intermediation of goods with the undertaking FREYTAG-
BERNDT – a supplier of cartographic products such as maps, atlases, globes and tourist guides. The
administrative proceedings has been initiated on a basis of incentive submitted by an undertaking
DUKÁT, which asked the Office to examine the facts, according to which the undertaking DUKÁT was
not permitted to participate in competition within the distribution of the mentioned cartographic products
into the chain of filling stations owned by undertaking OMV. Undertaking DUKÁT considered the
supplier contract on cartographic products concluded between OMV and underaking FREYTAG-
BERNDT as an exclusive one, which prevented undertaking DUKÁT from operating in products
distribution.
Office specified product relevant market as a market of distribution of cartographic products.
Undertakings FREYTAG-BERNDT and DUKÁT as the distributors of cartographic products acted in
the given relevant market as the rivals to each other. Undertaking OMV operated in the given relevant
market as an agent for the cartographic products supplies for the purchasers, which were in a rental or
agency relation with OMV.
Within the administrative proceedings the Office thoroughly analysed individual provisions of the
contract on possible violation of law and found out that the contract contained provisions which in their
nature constituted an agreement restricting competition. FREYTAG-BERNDT, defined as an applicant
in contract, was an undertaking interested in sales of cartographic products which can be sold in
a filling station network. According to the contract in question, the task of OMV, defined as an agent in
contract, was to mediate purchasers of contractual goods to an applicant, it means to FREYTAG-
BERNDT. In its investigation the Office acquired real evidence, according to which it was possible to
conclude that part of this contract in its wording Price of goods, which would be set in the sale
contracts between applicant and purchaser is always subject to approval by the authorized
representant of the agent. Also each price change is subject to this approval and it constitutes
a restriction of competition, resulting in one of the substantial negative impacts of the agreement
restricting competition to the market, where the non-existence of price competition led to high retail
prices of cartographic products sold to end users at OMV filling stations compared to prices in other
filling stations.
Similarly, the contract contained provisions on the basis of which OMV permitted miscellaneous goods
to be sold at OMV filling stations leased to third undertakings, decided which goods would be approved
for selling at the filling stations and bound the purchaser not to purchase goods from other suppliers
within the validity of the said contract.
Subjected provisions, influencing free choice of particular tenant of filling stations, regarding the
selection of goods and also the selection of their suppliers, were according to the opinion of the Office
|  |
|
| |
|
|
