Competition & Antitrust, Poland updates

Competition authority adopts new approach to gathering electronic evidence during dawn raids
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • October 12 2017

The Warsaw Court of Competition and Consumer Protection recently delivered a significant judgment regarding the collection of electronic evidence during unannounced inspections conducted by the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection. As a result, documents stored on hard drives and emails of managers and employees must now be reviewed by officials on the inspected company's premises.

Parliament adopts Act on Private Enforcement of Competition Law
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • June 15 2017

Parliament recently adopted the Act on Private Enforcement of Competition Law, which transposes the EU Antitrust Damages Directive into Polish law. The act aims to enhance the enforcement of the payment of compensation by companies that have infringed competition rules. The introduction of legal presumptions shifting the burden of proof onto the infringer and specific rules on the disclosure of evidence are steps in this direction.

OCCP imposes fine for resale price maintenance agreement
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • February 16 2017

The Office for Competition and Consumer Protection (OCCP) recently issued a decision in which it concluded that wholesale supplier Fordex and sports retailer Intersport had entered into an anti-competitive agreement and violated Article 6 of the Competition Act. The OCCP's decision stressed that price agreements (even vertical ones) are serious infringements of competition law to which neither the de minimis rule nor the block exemption regulations can be applied.

Price-fixing agreement facilitated by association of undertakings
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • November 03 2016

The Office for Competition and Consumer Protection recently imposed a fine on the Association of Polish Centres for Infertility Treatment and Reproduction Development for entering into an anti-competitive price-fixing agreement and violating the Competition Act. The penalty reflects the fact that price-fixing agreements are regarded as serious infringements of competition law.

Court of Appeal judgment on first antitrust case regarding joint bidding
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • September 08 2016

Although joint bidding is accepted by the European Union and national regulations, companies must remember that their cooperation may be subject to interest from competition authorities. This is because market players must comply with antitrust regulations when tendering collectively. The Warsaw Court of Appeal recently delivered a judgment in the first Polish antitrust case regarding bidding as a consortium.

Court applies EU 'soft law' in agency agreement decision
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • June 30 2016

A recent Warsaw Court of Appeal decision on an alleged anti-competitive agency agreement provides guidance on the interpretation of the Guidelines on Vertical Restraints for the competition authority and the courts. Polish law does not clarify whether agency agreements are anti-competitive and the issue was not previously covered in case law, so the judgment should be of interest to entrepreneurs and competition law practitioners.

No grounds for intervention regarding Uber's activities in Poland
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • May 19 2016

According to the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection (OCCP), the results of monitoring Uber's activities in Poland have provided no grounds for intervention. Instead, the OCCP stated that the entry of a new player on the local taxi market had strengthened competition, ensured a wider choice of carriers for consumers and forced Uber's competitors to improve the quality and innovativeness of their services.

Competition and Consumer Protection Act reform one year on
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law
  • Poland
  • April 14 2016

A year has passed since major amendments to the Competition and Consumer Protection Act came into force. The reform introduced significant changes, not only to the merger control regime, but also in the area of anti-monopoly practices (ie, anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position). In practice, the effects of the amendments are mainly visible in merger control, and include a substantial reduction in the duration of merger proceedings.

Current search