The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (Court) denied Gazprom’s (Company) application to renew court proceedings and upheld the Competition Council’s decision, according to which the Company breached merger condition.
On February 28 the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (Court) upheld the Competition Council’s decision of 10 December 2015 whereby UAB Mediashop (Company) was fined EUR 2 244 for misleading advertising.
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (Court) refused to reopen an investigation into the actions of UAB Maxima Lt and UAB Mantinga . The Court upheld the Council’s decision on a 10-year-long anti-competitive agreement between the companies.
The Competition Council found that UAB Elmis, UAB LEDEVILA and UAB Vortex Capital (Companies) concluded a collusive bidding agreement while participating in the public procurement for the purchase of construction and installation works.
On December 22 the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (hereinafter – SACL) upheld the Competition Council‘s (hereinafter – Council) decision of 2014 whereby Gazprom received a fine of more than EUR 35 million – Gazprom created obstacles for AB Lietuvos energijos gamyba to purchase natural gas from other supplier.
On December 8, 2016 the Competition Council found that in 2015 UAB Ekoaplinka , UAB Ecoservice and UAB Marijampolės švara (hereinafter – Companies) concluded a collusive bidding agreement while participating in the public procurement for the purchase of municipal waste collection and transportation services, which was organised by UAB...
On December 5, 2016 the Competition Council found that in 2014 UAB Žagarės inžinerija and UAB Rovaltra (hereinafter – Companies) concluded a collusive bidding agreement while participating in the public procurement for the purchase of machinery organised by UAB Fontas LT , and thus breached the Law on Competition.
Seimas adopted amendments to the Law on Competition and the Law on Local Self-Government initiated by the President of the Republic of Lithuania. From 1 January 2017 public administrative bodies will face fines for competition law breaches and stricter regulation related to economic activities carried out by municipal companies.
Vilnius Regional Administrative Court (hereinafter – Court) rejected the appeal by UAB Pigu (hereinafter – Company) against the Competition Council‘s (hereinafter – Council) decision of 16 June 2016 whereby the Company disseminated misleading perfume and home appliance advertisements and thus breached Article 5 of the Law on Advertising.
Last week after the final ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania UAB Mantinga paid a fine of EUR 2 151 417 and EUR 192 569 of interest. The Competition Council (hereinafter – Council) fined UAB Mantinga for a 10-year-long anti-competitive agreement with MAXIMA LT, UAB (hereinafter – MAXIMA LT ). The parties...
The Competition Council (hereinafter – Council) found that UAB Nemuno vaistinė (hereinafter – Company) made false claims about 30 per cent cheaper products sold in the pharmacies of Camelia (hereinafter – Camelia ), and thus breached Article 5 of the Law on Advertising.
After the final ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania MAXIMA LT, UAB ( MAXIMA LT ) paid a cartel fine of EUR 13 666 216 and EUR 1 082 095,46 of interest. The Competition Council fined MAXIMA LT for a 10-year-long anti-competitive agreement with UAB Mantinga . The parties agreed to refrain from selling...