5. 11. 2021

New Act on Protection of Competition

The new Act on Protection of Competition brings many important changes that everyone doing business in Slovakia should be aware of.

The former act was limited to natural or legal persons registered in the commercial register or other registers. Now the law applies to any entity performing business activities or other activities which might affect the competition irrespective of the legal form, existence of any legal identity or manner of financing of such entity.

The change in notification criteria relating to establishment of a new joint venture will significantly decrease the administrative burden on entrepreneurs. Before, creation of a joint venture was subject to review by the Antimonopoly Office, if the turnover criteria regarding parties of the joint venture were met, even if the joint venture was intended to perform no business in Slovakia. Thus, even extraterritorial joint ventures not affecting the competition on the Slovak market were subject to the Antimonopoly Office’s review. If entrepreneurs failed to notify such joint venture duly and timely, the Antimonopoly Office was entitled to impose a fine. Now, the creation of an extraterritorial joint venture shall no longer be assessed by the Antimonopoly Office.

Furthermore, the new act introduces several minor improvements which shall increase the effectiveness of the proceedings held by the Antimonopoly Office. It expressly empowers the Antimonopoly Office to decide on interim measures, if there is a reasonable assumption that (a) a cartel agreement was concluded or a dominant position was abused and (b) there is a risk of serious and irreparable harm to competition. Besides, the Antimonopoly Office is newly entitled to:

  • impose any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to bring the infringement effectively to an end, provided if it is proven that a certain infringement has occurred,

  • require oral statements and explanations from any person who might dispose with relevant information at any time irrespective of the fact whether proceedings were formally commenced by the Antimonopoly Office, or

  • impose forfeits for failure to obey any decision by the Antimonopoly Office or to fulfil any duties during the antitrust inspection etc.

The new legislation clearly represents a big step forward. It now remains to be seen how the Antimonopoly Office and entrepreneurs will get accustomed thereto.

By JUDr. Zuzana Tužilová

Download

G&P Newsletter 2/2021 (PDF)

Author

News & Publications

Another Success for Giese & Partner Before the European Court of Human Rights

Another Success for Giese & Partner Before the European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights has once again confirmed the arguments presented by Giese & Partner. In a recent case, the Czech Republic acknowledged a violation of the right to a fair trial, marking another successful outcome for attorney-at-law Ondřej Rathouský before the ECtHR.

From Ankara to Brno: Why the Constitutional Court Intervened Before Deciding the NATO Dispute

From Ankara to Brno: Why the Constitutional Court Intervened Before Deciding the NATO Dispute

The Czech Constitutional Court’s interim measure secured the President’s participation in the NATO summit but left the underlying constitutional dispute unresolved. The case highlights the role of established constitutional practice when the written Constitution provides no clear answer and raises broader questions about the balance of power between the President and the Government.

Who Will Inherit Your Digital Life? Digital Estate Part One

Who Will Inherit Your Digital Life? Digital Estate Part One

What happens to online accounts, cloud-stored data and cryptocurrency after death? This introduction to the digital estate explains which assets may pass to heirs, why legal inheritance does not always mean practical access and what the German Facebook case reveals about digital inheritance.