Decision no. 1367/2016 of 22 April 2016

This case concerns violation of art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Law no. 21/1996 and art. 101 paragraph (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, consisting in participation in a concerted agreement and / or practice with regard to the withdrawal of Eco Premium gasoline off the retail market.  It is a request of an oil company to annul the decision of the Competition Council to fine it for having participated in this agreement. The High Court partially upheld the undertaking's action and decided to reduce the fine. The undertaking invoked a plea of illegality of...

Read more

Decision no. 1343/2016 of 21 April 2016

In this case, a petroleum undertaking asked the court to annul the fine imposed by the Competition Council for participating in deals with other companies on the market for withdrawal of Eco Premium gasoline off the retail market. The undertaking was thus accused of violating art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Law no. 21/1996 and art. 101 paragraph (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, consisting of participation in a concerted agreement and / or practice. The High Court partially upheld the appeal, lowering the amount of the fine, but a judge made a separate opinion,...

Read more

Decision no. 2714/2015 of 9 July 2015

In this case, a petroleum undertaking was charged and sanctioned by the Competition Council for violating art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Law no. 21/1996 and art. 101 paragraph (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, consisting in participating in a concerted agreement and / or practice with regard to the withdrawal of Eco Premium gasoline from retail sales. The High Court upheld the Competition Council's decision but reduced the amount of the fine. The evidence presented demonstrates convincingly the intention of the parties to adopt a common commercial strategy to stop the marketing of ECO...

Read more

Decision no. 2706/2015 of 1 July 2015

In this case, a petroleum undertaking sued the Competition Council in court, after having been investigated and sanctioned for violation of Art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Law no. 21/1996 and art. 101 paragraph (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, consisting in participating in a concerted agreement and / or practice with regard to the withdrawal of Eco Premium gasoline off the retail market. The High Court partially upheld the appeal and reduced the amount of the fine. The initial order to commence the investigation was factually and lawfully justified in order to substantiate the...

Read more

Decision no. 52/2015 of January 15, 2015

This case concerns violation of the provisions of Art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Competition Law no. 21/1996 and Art. 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in the context of a public procurement procedure. It is the case of the complainants SC A. SRL, SC B. GMBH and SC C. LTD, who have sought the annulment of a decision by the Competition Council to fine companies for anticompetitive agreements. There is an agreement within the meaning of the legal provisions where the parties expressly or implicitly adopt a common plan by establishing a common direction...

Read more

Decision no. 4503/2014 of 26 November 2014

This case shows a violation of the provisions of art. 5, paragraph (1) letter a) of the Law no. 21/1996 by taxi operators, by establishing an anticompetitive agreement, materialized by signing a pricing settlement agreement and practicing single minimum taxi rates. Concerning the invocation of the error of law as a vice of consent under art. 1206 paragraph (2) Civ. Code "Interpreted per a contrario", the High Court finds, in agreement with the first instance, that such defence cannot be accepted, considering the general principle of the law nemo censetur ignorare legem, which expresses the notion that no one cannot...

Read more

Decision no. 2870/2014 of 18 June 2014

This case concerns violation of the provisions of Art. 5 paragraph (1) of the Competition Law no. 21/1996 and Art. 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in a public procurement procedure organized by C.N.A.D.N.R. SA. The facts analysed in the Competition Council's investigation focused on the anticompetitive behaviour of the parties involved in participating in the public procurement procedure in question, concluding that these, constituted in two associations, made a participation agreement with rigged bids by increasing bidding prices and subsequent division of public procurement contracts, which is similar to the division of markets. An...

Read more

Decision no. 2627/2014 of 4 June 2014

The case concerns violation of the provisions of Art. 5 paragraph (1) letter f) from the law and the provisions of Art. 101 paragraph (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the occasion of participating in a public procurement procedure. According to Art. 5 paragraph (1) letter f) of Law no. 21/1996 "Any agreements between undertakings, decisions of associations of undertakings and concerted practices, which have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition on the Romanian market or on part of it, are prohibited, especially those: (...) f) participating, in a concerted...

Read more

Decision no. 1739/2014 of 3 April 2014

The President of the Competition Council ordered, by Order no. 299 of August 27, 2008, the commencement ex-officio of an investigation on the possible violation of the provisions of Art. 5 paragraph (1) of Law no. 21/1996, republished, by the undertakings involved in the taxi transportation activity in Timişoara Municipality and Art. 9 of the same law by the Local Council of Timişoara Municipality. Following the analysis carried out during the investigation and the documents in the file, it was concluded that between 28 November 2007 and April 2009 the provisions of Art. 5 paragraph (1) letter a) of Law...

Read more

Decision no. 1394/2014 of 19 March 2014

In this case, the complainants SC A. SRL and SC B. SRL sued the defendant the Competition Council to request the annulment of the Competition Council's decision whereby the undertakings were fined for concerted practices regarding the establishment of tariffs for passenger transportation services taxi. The High Court rejected the appeal of the companies. The involvement in a cartel with regard to an anticompetitive behaviour consisted in deciding, for their affiliated taxis, that both the simultaneous and single-priced increase of the distance tariff and of the tariffs subsequent to the main taxi fare, which clearly indicates the existence of concerted...

Read more
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Find jurisprudence

  • Category

  • Tag

  • Year