The Reykjavík District Court has today acquitted the Competition Authority of a claim by Síminn hf. to annul a ruling of the Competition Appeals Board, in a case which also involves Vodafone (Sýn) and Nova.
The background to the matter is that, by a decision in 2015, the Competition Authority authorised Vodafone and Nova to enter into a specific collaboration concerning the operation of a distribution network for mobile phone services. The condition for this was that the companies agreed to comply with conditions intended to prevent their cooperation on the operation of the network from distorting competition in the mobile services market, both at wholesale and retail levels. The conditions were also intended to create more choices and thus greater opportunities for existing and new service providers in the retail market for mobile services, thereby fostering further competition in the relevant markets. An opportunity is also created for better utilisation of investments in underlying mobile network infrastructure.
Síminn was dissatisfied with the decision of the Competition Authority and appealed it to the Competition Appeals Board, which upheld it. Síminn subsequently brought a case before the courts, and the District Court delivered its judgment in the matter today.
The Competition Authority's investigation was in every respect thorough and detailed.
In the case, Síminn based its argument, among other things, on the fact that the Competition Authority had not investigated the matter adequately and that more detailed conditions should have been imposed on the collaboration. The District Court rejects this. It is the district court's conclusion that the Competition Authority's investigation was in every respect thorough and detailed. It is the conclusion of the District Court that there is no reason to doubt the Competition Authority's assessment that the conditions were sufficient in light of the provisions of the Competition Act.
Expert appraisal by appointed valuers does not alter the Competition Authority's valuation.
During the proceedings, Síminn obtained an expert report from appointed experts to support its case. The district court finds that the expert report does not alter the assessment of the Competition Authority in the matter. The district court also declines to consider a report from a foreign consultancy firm obtained by Síminn, on the grounds that it was procured unilaterally.
Appellate Board's decision based on correct grounds
In the case, Síminn based its argument, among other things, on the fact that the appeal board's ruling was based on incorrect premises. The district court rejects this, stating that the wording in the ruling cannot be interpreted in as narrow a sense as Síminn suggests in its case.
"*" indicates required fields
