In a judgment of the Reykjavík District Court, which was delivered on 18 November, it was ruled that recent exemptions from competition law, which permit meat processing plants to merge and have specific consultations with one another, are contrary to the constitution and therefore have no legal force.
Following the judgment, the Competition Authority sent a letter to meat processing plants and their associations. In it, they were reminded that, according to the district court's ruling, the exemption provisions of the agricultural produce laws were inconsistent with the constitution and therefore did not have the force of law. Consequently, competition law applies in full to the cooperation and mergers of meat processing plants. Meat processing plants have therefore not enjoyed any exemption from the provisions of competition law.
The Competition Authority gave meat processing plants the opportunity to submit views that may be used in the consideration of how to respond to the district court's judgment. Furthermore, the Authority has given other interested parties the opportunity to submit views and has held meetings and discussions regarding the matter, see. Notice of the supervisory authority of 19 November.
Under the Code of Civil Procedure, the Competition Authority is permitted to request permission to appeal a district court's judgment directly to the Supreme Court. Such permission may be granted if the outcome of the case may have a precedent effect, have general significance for the application of legal rules, or otherwise have significant public importance.
Having considered the views submitted, the Competition Authority has decided to seek permission to appeal the judgment of the Reykjavík District Court of 18 November directly to the Supreme Court. In the opinion of the Competition Authority, the outcome of the case has an obvious precedential value regarding its authority to apply competition law to mergers of meat processing plants and other conduct by such undertakings that may contravene the provisions of the Competition Act. Furthermore, in the view of the Competition Authority, the outcome of the case has general significance regarding the constitutional validity of Act No. 30/2024 amending the Agricultural Produce Act and the requirement contained in Article 44. clause of the Constitution regarding the requirement that no bill may be passed until it has been debated in three readings in the Althingi. Furthermore, the outcome of the case has significant public importance, given the impact that the exemption provisions of the Agricultural Produce Act have on the working conditions of farmers and on competition in the meat market.
The Competition Authority has also today written to meat processing plants and their associations. The letter informs them of the Authority's decision to appeal the district court's judgment. Furthermore, the relevant parties are instructed not to take any action that could contravene competition law while this case is before the courts.
"*" indicates required fields
