Printable version of the document in PDF format.
2000.
GVH`S PROCEEDINGS ENDED WITH THE DECISION OF THE COMPETITION COUNCIL
1. OVERVIEW
|
|
Number of cases |
% of cases |
Imposed fines (1000 HUF) |
% of fines |
Fines imposed for failed notifica-tions (1000 HUF) | |
|
Abuse of dominant position |
56 |
19 |
23,8 |
11800 |
7,6 |
- |
|
abusive |
31 |
15 |
18,8 |
2500 |
1,6 |
- |
|
restrictive |
22 |
4 |
5,0 |
9300 |
6,0 |
- |
|
composite and other |
3 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 |
- |
|
Restrictive agreements |
18 |
11 |
13,8 |
96000 |
62,2 |
0 |
|
horizontal |
9 |
8 |
10,0 |
11000 |
7,1 |
0 |
|
vetical |
6 |
1 |
1,3 |
5000 |
3,2 |
0 |
|
composite and other |
3 |
2 |
2,5 |
80000 |
51,8 |
0 |
|
Concentration |
70 |
3 |
3,8 |
- |
- |
2740 |
|
horizontal |
41 |
2 |
2,5 |
- |
- |
2550 |
|
vertical |
14 |
0 |
0,0 |
- |
- |
190 |
|
composite and other |
15 |
1 |
1,3 |
- |
- |
0 |
|
Antitrust cases altogether |
144 |
33 |
41,3 |
107800 |
69,8 |
2740 |
|
Consumer fraud |
86 |
47 |
58,8 |
46600 |
30,2 |
- |
|
All cases |
230 [2] |
80 |
100,0 |
154400 |
100,0 |
2740 |
|
% of cases |
100,0 |
34,8 |
| |||
Printable version of the document in PDF format.
2. DETAILS
2.1. Unfair manipulation of consumers` choice
|
|
Number of cases [3] |
% of cases |
|
Establishment of the infringement |
40 |
46,5 |
|
Termination after suspension |
7 |
8,1 |
|
GVH`s interventions |
47 |
54,7 |
|
Other terminations |
39 |
45,3 |
|
Other |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Cases altogether |
86 |
100,0 |
|
Imposed fines |
46600 |
|
Printable version of the document in PDF format.
2.2. Abuse of dominant position
|
|
Abusive [4] |
Restrictive [5] |
Altogether [7] |
% of cases | |
|
Establishment of the infringement |
4 |
4 |
0 |
8 |
14,3 |
|
Termination of proceedings after suspension |
11 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
19,6 |
|
GVH`s interventions |
15 |
4 |
0 |
19 |
33,9 |
|
Termination of proceedings withouth suspension |
16 |
18 |
3 |
37 |
66,1 |
|
Other |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Cases altogether |
31 |
22 |
3 |
56 |
100,0 |
|
% of cases |
55,4 |
39,3 |
5,4 |
100,0 | |
|
Imposed fines |
2500 |
9300 |
0 |
11800 | |
|
% of fines imposed by GVH |
21,2 |
78,8 |
0,0 |
100,0 |
Printable version of the document in PDF format.
2.3. Restrictive agreements
|
|
Horizontal [8] |
Vertical [9] |
Composite [10] |
Altogether [11] |
% of cases |
Initiated ex officio |
% of cases initiated ex officio |
|
Illegal agreements |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
16,7 |
3 |
25,0 |
|
Termination of proceedings after suspension |
6 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
33,3 |
6 |
50,0 |
|
Conditional exemption |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
11,1 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Voluntary acceptance of the proposal of GVH |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
GVH`s interventions altogether |
8 |
1 |
2 |
11 |
61,1 |
9 |
75,0 |
|
Individual exemptions |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
5,6 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 | |
|
0 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
22,2 |
2 |
16,7 | |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
5,6 |
1 |
8,3 | |
|
Other |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
5,6 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Cases altogether |
9 |
6 |
3 |
18 |
100,0 |
12 |
100,0 |
|
% of cases |
50,0 |
33,3 |
16,7 |
100,0 |
| ||
|
Not notified |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 | |||
|
Initiated ex officio |
7 |
4 |
1 |
12 | |||
|
% of cases initiated ex officio |
58,3 |
33,3 |
8,3 |
100,0 | |||
|
Fines imposed by GVH |
11000 |
5000 |
80000 |
96000 | |||
|
% of fines |
11,5 |
5,2 |
83,3 |
100,0 | |||
|
Fines imposed for the failure of the notification of the agreement |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 | |||
Printable version of the document in PDF format.
2.4. Concentrations
|
|
Horizontal [15] |
Vertical [16] |
Composite and other [17] |
Altogether [18] |
% of cases |
Initiated ex officio |
% of cases initiated ex officio |
|
Prohibition |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1,4 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Conditional approval |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2,9 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Voluntary acceptance of the proposal of GVH |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
GVH`s interventions altogether |
2 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
4,3 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Other refusals |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Approvals |
37 |
11 |
10 |
58 |
82,9 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
2 |
3 |
4 |
9 |
12,9 |
3 |
100,0 | |
|
Other terminations of proceedings |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0,0 |
0 |
0,0 |
|
Cases altogether |
41 |
14 |
15 |
70 |
100,0 |
3 |
100,0 |
|
% of cases |
58,6 |
20,0 |
21,4 |
100,0 |
| ||
|
Not notified |
9 |
1 |
2 |
12 | |||
|
Initiated ex officio |
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 | |||
|
% of cases initiated ex officio |
33,3 |
0,0 |
66,7 |
100,0 | |||
|
Fines imposed for the lack of notification |
2550 |
190 |
0 |
2740 | |||
|
% of fines imposed for the lack of notification |
93,1 |
6,9 |
0,0 |
100,0 | |||
Footnotes
-
Depending on the type of the case, GVH (Hungarian competition authority) interventions might result in different types of decisions:
- establishment of the infringement: applied in all types of cases (However the category of `failure to notify the concentration` is not included although these are also infringements of the Competition Act. This influence the overall number of infringements and fines.)
- termination of proceedings after suspension: applied in all types of cases (except the concentrations)
- refusal of the exemption: applied in the case of restrictive agreements
- prohibited concentrations (refused notifications): applied in the case of concentrations and restrictive agreements
- imposition of condition: applied in the case of restrictive agreements and concentrations
- voluntary acceptance of the reflections of GVH: applied in the case of concentrations and restrictive agreements -
The number of the proceedings (230) and the number of the decisions taken (233) are not equal because seven times cases involved two different matters and therefore GVH brought decision in both part of these cases.
The cases were the followings:
Vj-61/1999: consumer fraud and abuse of dominant position
Vj-147/1999: consumer fraud and restrictive agreement
Vj-173/1999: consumer fraud and abuse of dominant position
Vj-56/2000: abuse of dominant position and restrictive agreement
Vj-68/2000: consumer fraud and abuse of dominant position
Vj-77/2000: consumer fraud and abuse of dominant position
Vj-111/2000: consumer fraud and abuse of dominant position -
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.
-
Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.
-
Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement
-
Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.