Með dómi Landsréttar, sem kveðinn var upp í dag, var staðfestur dómur Héraðsdóms Reykjavíkur um alvarleg brot Mjólkursamsölunnar (MS) á samkeppnislögum. Með dóminum hafnaði Landsréttur kröfu MS um að sekt vegna brotanna að fjárhæð 480 m. kr. yrði felld niður.
The Reykjavík District Court had upheld the Competition Authority's demand that MS be fined for abusing its dominant market position by selling a basic raw material for the production of dairy products to its competitors, i.e.i.e. raw milk, at a higher price than that which MS itself and related parties (Kaupfélag Skagfirðinga (KS) and its subsidiary) had to pay. The District Court therefore overturned the majority's finding on the Competition Appeals Board that the Agricultural Produce Act had permitted the company's conduct.
MS skaut málinu Landsréttar. Í dómi Landsréttar, sem var kveðinn upp í dag, er því hafnað að ákvæði búvörulaga hafi heimilað MS að mismuna keppinautum sínum. Í dóminum er tekið fram að þau ákvæði búvörulaga sem MS hafi vísað til geti ekki með „nokkrum hætti“ undanskilið fyrirtækið frá banni samkeppnislaga við misnotkun á markaðsráðandi stöðu. Í dóminum er staðfest að MS hafi beitt smáa keppinauta sína samkeppnishamlandi mismunun og er tekið fram að þetta brot á 11. gr. samkeppnislaga hafi verið „alvarlegt auk þess sem það stóð lengi og var augljóslega mjög til þess fallið að raska samkeppnistöðu.“ Þá hafi það lotið „að mikilvægri neysluvöru og snerti á þann hátt allan almenning í landinu.“
Með dómi Landsréttar er jafnframt staðfest að MS hafi brotið gegn skyldu sinni til að veita upplýsingar samkvæmt samkeppnislögum með því að halda mikilvægu gagni frá Samkeppniseftirlitinu. Í dómnum er tekið fram að MS, sem sé markaðsráðandi fyrirtæki, hafi mátt vera fullljóst að með háttsemi sinni væri fyrirtækið að torvelda rannsókn málsins.
Dómur Landsréttar hefur mikla þýðingu fyrir starfsumhverfi í framleiðslu mjólkurafurða hér á landi og styrkir stöðu bænda og neytenda.
Background information:
In July 2016, the Competition Authority concluded that Mjólkursamsalan (MS) had seriously breached the prohibition in Article 11 of the Competition Act against the abuse of a dominant market position. Specifically, MS had abused its dominant market position by selling a basic raw material for the production of dairy products to its competitors, i.e.e.g. raw milk, at an unreasonably high price, at the same time as MS itself and related parties (Kaupfélag Skagfirðinga (KS) and its subsidiary) received the same raw material at a much lower price, and furthermore below cost price. The conclusion of the investigation was that this had given MS and the related parties a significant competitive advantage over their rivals. In this way, the ability of such parties to compete with MS and its affiliated companies had been seriously impaired, which ultimately served to harm the interests of consumers and farmers.
MS appealed the decision of the Competition Authority to the Competition Appeals Tribunal, which issued its own úrskurð 18. nóvember 2016. Meirihluti nefndarinnar komst m.a. að þeirri niðurstöðu að undanþáguákvæði búvörulaga hefðu vikið banni samkeppnislaga við misnotkun á markaðsráðandi stöðu til hliðar. Af þessu leiddi að sekt MS vegna brota á 11. gr. samkeppnislaga var felld úr gildi. Á hinn bóginn staðfesti nefndin að MS hefði framið alvarlegt brot á upplýsingaskyldu samkeppnislaga og að fyrirtækinu bæri að greiða 40.000.000 kr. sekt vegna þess.
After reviewing the grounds of the majority of the Appeal Board, the Competition Authority concluded that it should refer the aforementioned ruling to the courts and sued MS before the Reykjavík District Court to have the aforementioned decision of the majority of the Appeal Board on co-opil the Agricultural Produce Act and the Competition Act. The action was brought to determine whether the prohibition in the Competition Act against the abuse of a dominant position applied in full to MS. Furthermore, a final resolution would be obtained as to whether the company should face full liability for the conduct in question, which the Competition Authority had assessed as serious infringements against its smaller competitors.
With legislation that came into force in 2011, the Competition Authority was granted the power to appeal the decisions of the appeals board to the courts, whereas prior to the law's enactment, only individual companies could bring such cases. The purpose of this legislative change was to better enable the Competition Authority to„to protect the legitimate public interest inherent in effective competition“. The legislature considered it important that the Competition Authority could bring an action„major and important issues“...concerning consumer interests before the courts. In this way, a balance would be maintained between the protection of the public interest and the private interests of companies in competition matters before the courts.
"*" indicates required fields
