Decision of the Competition Appeals Board on Samskip's request for a stay of effect concerning the Competition Authority's decision on the company's infringement.

• The Appeals Committee suspends the effect of the decision with regard to the payment of administrative fines, while the case is pending before the Committee.

• The Appeal Board rejects Samskip's request to suspend the effect of the measures for the actions provided for in the decision.

The Competition Authority concluded its investigation into Samskip's infringements on 31 August, pursuant to decision no. 33/2023. The authority concluded that Samskip had seriously breached the prohibition in Article 10 of the Competition Act and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement, through a long-running illegal collusion with Eimskip. Furthermore, the Competition Authority concluded that Samskip had breached Article 19 of the Competition Act during the investigation by providing incorrect, misleading and insufficient information and failing to submit documents. The combined administrative fines for the aforementioned infringements amount to 4.2 billion krónur.

Samskip was also required to take specific measures to prevent further infringements and to enhance competition.

On 27 September 2023, Samskip appealed the decision of the Competition Authority to the Competition Appeals Board, demanding that it be annulled. Samskip also requested that the decision of the Competition Authority be suspended pending the appeal before the Competition Appeals Board, but under Article 29 of the Administrative Procedure Act, a higher authority may grant such a suspension where reasons so warrant.

In support of its application for a stay of execution, Samskip argued that (1) payment of the fine would cause the company financial hardship, (2) the proceedings before the appeal board would take a long time, (3) that measures the company would have to take to prevent further infringements and enhance competition would be likely to cause it damage and that (4) there was a high probability that the Competition Authority's decision would be amended or annulled.

Legal effect of administrative fine deferred due to long proceedings before the committee

Today's decision by the appeal board refers to the case being very extensive and, in that respect, having no parallel in domestic competition law. In light of these facts, it is clear that the proceedings before the appeal board will be delayed, and it is to be expected that a considerable amount of time will pass before a decision is reached by the board. It is therefore clear that the hearing of the case before the panel will not be completed within the time limits prescribed by law.

In light of this, the Appeals Committee considered that there were circumstances which were in many ways special and unusual, justifying a suspension of the legal effect with regard to the part of the decision concerning the payment of the imposed fine. Accordingly, the suspension of the enforcement of the decision in respect of the payment of the fine was ordered pending the appeal.

The Competition Appeals Tribunal refuses to suspend the effect of its orders

The appeal board's ruling, however, rejects a stay of the effect of the instructions issued by the Competition Authority to Samskip, such as requiring the company to cease all commercial cooperation with Eimskip and its affiliated companies, unless it could be demonstrated that the cooperation was of such a nature that there was no risk of distorting competition. The panel considered that the orders were neither unusual nor particularly burdensome for the company, such that the circumstances justifying a stay of their effect were not present.

The ruling is available here.