Resolutions > Statistics

2001

Printable version of the document in PDF format.

2001.
GVH`S PROCEEDINGS ENDED WITH THE DECISION OF THE COMPETITION COUNCIL

1. OVERVIEW

 

Number of cases

Intervention of GVH [1]

% of cases

Imposed fines (1000 HUF)

% of fines

Fines imposed for failed notifications (1000 HUF)

Abuse of dominant position

33

3

8.1

10,000

16.8

-

abusive

15

0

0.0

0

0.0

-

restrictive

12

0

0.0

0

0.0

-

composite and other

6

3

8.1

10,000

16.8

-

Restrictive agreements

10

1

2.7

0

0.0

0

horizontal

7

1

2.7

0

0.0

0

vertical

3

0

0.0

0

0.0

0

composite and other

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

0

Concentration

81

2

5.4

-

-

13,900

horizontal

44

1

2.7

-

-

13,900

vertical

11

0

0.0

-

-

0

composite and other

26

1

2.7

-

-

0

Antitrust cases altogether

124

6

16.2

10,000

16.8

13,900

Consumer fraud

59

31

83.8

49,700

83.2

-

delusion of consumer

56

29

78.4

39,700

66.5

-

restricting the choice of onsumer

2

2

5.4

10,000

16.8

-

composite

1

0

0.0

0

0.0

-

All cases

183

37

100.0

59,700

100.0

13,900

% of cases

100,0

20.2

 

Printable version of the document in PDF format.

2. DETAILS

2.1. Unfair manipulation of consumers` choice
 

Number of cases [2]

% of cases

Establishment of the infringement

25

41.1

Termination after suspension

6

10.7

GVH`s interventions

31

51.8

Other terminations

28

48.2

Other

0

0.0

Cases altogether

59

100.0

Fines imposed (1000 HUF)

49,700

 

Number of cases ended with imposition of fine

18

 

Printable version of the document in PDF format.

2.2. Abuse of dominant position
 

Abusive [3]

Restrictive [4]

Composite and other [5]

Altogether [6]

%

Infringements

0

0

2

2

6.1

Termination of proceedings after suspension

0

0

1

1

3.0

GVH interventions altogether

0

0

3

3

9.1

Termination of proceedings (without suspension)

15

12

3

30

90.9

Other

0

0

0

0

0.0

Cases altogether

15

12

6

33

100.0

% of cases

45.5

36.4

18.2

100.0

Fines imposed (1000 HUF)

0

0

10,000

10,000

% of fines

0.0

0.0

100.0

100.0

Fines related to the proceedings (1000 HUF)

0

0

0

0

Number of cases ended with imposition of fines

0

0

2

2

Printable version of the document in PDF format.

2.3. Restrictive agreements
 

Horizontal [7]

Vertical [8]

Composite [9]

Altogether [10]

% of cases

Initiated ex officio

% of cases initiated ex officio

Illegal agreements

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Termination of proceedings after suspension

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Conditional approval

1

0

0

1

10.0

0

0.0

Voluntary acceptance of the proposal of GVH

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

GVH interventions altogether

1

0

0

1

10.0

0

0.0

Individual exemption

3

1

0

4

40.0

0

0.0

Exempted under a block exemption regulation [11]

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Non prohibited agreement [12]

3

1

0

4

40.0

3

75.0

Non restrictive agreement [13]

0

1

0

1

10.0

1

25.0

Other kind of suspension

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Cases altogether

7

3

0

10

100.0

4

100.0

% of cases

70.0

30.0

0.0

100.0

 

Not notificated

0

0

0

0

Withdrawal of group exemption

0

0

0

0

Initiated ex officio

2

2

0

4

% of cases initiated ex officio

50.0

50.0

0.0

100.0

Fines imposed by GVH (1000 HUF)

0

0

0

0

% of fines

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Fines imposed for the failure of the notification of the agreement

0

0

0

0

Cases ended with imposition of fines

0

0

0

0

Printable version of the document in PDF format.

2.4. Concentrations
 

Horizontal [14]

Vertical [15]

Composite and other [16]

Altogether [17]

% of cases

Initiated ex officio

% of cases initiated ex officio

Prohibition

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Conditional approval

1

0

1

2

2.5

0

0.0

Voluntary acceptance of the proposal of GVH

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

GVH intervention altogether

1

0

1

2

2.5

0

0.0

Other refusals

0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0.0

Approvals

40

10

23

73

90.1

4

80.0

Not subject to authorisation/ not concentration [18]

2

0

2

4

4.9

1

20.0

Other terminations of proceedings

1

1

0

2

2.5

0

0.0

Cases altogether

44

11

26

81

100.0

5

100.0

Decision in the first phase [19]

14

5

11

30

 

Decisions in the second phase [20]

3

2

3

8

% of cases

54.3

13.6

32.1

100.0

Not notificated

4

0

2

6

Initiated ex officio

2

0

3

5

% of cases initiated ex officio

40.0

0.0

60.0

100.0

Fines imposed for the lack of notification

13,900

0

0

13,900

% of fines imposed for the lack of notification

100.0

0.0

0.0

100.0


Footnotes
  • Depending on the type of the case, GVH (Hungarian competition authority) interventions might result in different types of decisions:
    - establishment of the infringement: applied in all types of cases (However the category of `failure to notify the concentration` is not included although these are also infringements of the Competition Act. This influence the overall number of infringements and fines.)
    - termination of proceedings after suspension: applied in all types of cases (except the concentrations)
    - refusal of the exemption: applied in the case of restrictive agreements
    - prohibited concentrations (refused notifications): applied in the case of concentrations and restrictive agreements
    - imposition of condition: applied in the case of restrictive agreements and concentrations
    - voluntary acceptance of the reflections of GVH: applied in the case of concentrations and restrictive agreements

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement.

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decesions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.

  • Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.

  • Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.

  • Cases in which the decisions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decisions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decisions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Cases in which the decisions were taken in more than one matter are represented in the table according to the most serious infringement

  • Termination of proceedings by formal decision in cases initiated ex officio.

  • Such decomposition of the time limit is in force only from the 1st of February 2001, therefore the total number of cases is not equal with the sum of the two -phased cases.

  • Such decomposition of the time limit is in force only from the 1st of February 2001, therefore the total number of cases is not equal with the sum of the two -phased cases.