The Supreme Court has today confirmed judgment The District Court of Reykjavík ruled that the decision by the competition authorities to deny Valitor hf. access to documents should be overturned. The background to the case is that Borgun hf. submitted a complaint to the Competition Authority concerning the conduct of Valitor hf. During the proceedings, the Competition Authority acceded to Borgun's request that certain information in the complaint be treated as confidential. Valitor was therefore denied access to the information. The case was appealed twice to the Competition Appeals Board, and the outcome of the second ruling was that the Competition Authority's decision to deny access to information about certain customers of Borgun should be upheld. Valitor challenged that decision in the Reykjavík District Court.
A Reykjavík District Court ruling confirms that the interests of competition authority whistleblowers can justify their anonymity from a dominant undertaking, thereby restricting its access to data that could reveal their identity. On the other hand, it was pointed out that this would only apply if there were a genuine reason to fear that the informants could suffer harm if they were identified. The court considered that this was not the case in this instance. It was not therefore the case that the interests of the relevant parties in maintaining anonymity were significantly more compelling than the interests of Valitor Ltd. in being permitted to inspect the case file.
As previously stated, the Supreme Court has now upheld this judgment of the district court, referring to its reasons.
"*" indicates required fields
