A weekly news magazine Veidas honoured the best state institutions and civil servants, including the Lithuanian Competition Council.
The Competition Council found that UAB Concretus Materials together with UAB Vilniaus betonas and UAB GG Investment (hereinafter – Companies) failed to provide complete and accurate information for the examination of a merger whereby UAB Concretus Materials intended to acquire up to 51 per cent of AB Akmenės cementas shares.
Vilnius Regional Administrative Court (hereinafter – Court) rejected the appeal by UAB Forum Cinemas (hereinafter – Company) against the Competition Council‘s decision whereby the Company was fined EUR 1 384 300 for concluding an anti-competitive agreement.
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (hereinafter – Court) rejected the appeals by MAXIMA LT, UAB (hereinafter – MAXIMA LT ) and UAB Mantinga and upheld the Competition Council‘s decision, according to which, the aforementioned companies concluded an anti-competitive agreement.
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (the Court) upheld the Competition Council‘s (KT) decision as of April 18, 2013 to impose a fine of 341 057 EUR on JSC Lukoil Baltija for implementing non-notified mergers.
Vilnius Administrative Regional Court upheld the decision by Lithuanian Competition Council’s to fine Gazprom for the failure to comply with merger conditions and market foreclosure.
Competition Council sent a statement of objections to UAB RIMI LIETUVA suspected of abusing its market power. According to the Council‘s preliminary evaluation, the regulation and use of UAB RIMI LIETUVA marketing budget contradicts fair-trade practices and restricts the possibilities for providers to negotiate the conditions of sales.