ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)

Aydeniz Baytaş

ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
Associate

Aydeniz Baytaş is an associate at the competition law and regulatory department of ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law. Aydeniz completed her Bachelor of Laws degree with Honours in Law in 2015 at the Marmara University. She was admitted to the Istanbul Bar in 2016. She obtained her LL.M. degree in International Trade Law and Commercial Law from Durham University in 2018. Aydeniz Baytaş provides legal advice to a wide range of clients on investigations initiated by the Turkish Competition Authority and on merger control issues related to both domestic and cross-border transactions. Additionally, she assists clients with their day-to-day competition and regulatory compliance matters and plays an active role in defending local and international clients. Aydeniz is fluent in English.

Linked authors

ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)

Articles

655 Bulletin

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Görkem Yardım, Aydeniz Baytaş, Melisa Terzioğlu The Turkish Competition Authority finds manufacturers of medical imaging and diagnostic devices not liable for abuse of dominance in relation to the provision of access codes and activation tools for the maintenance of medical imaging devices (Türk Philips Ticaret)

85

This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Philips decision (26.08.2021, 21-40/589-286) in which the Board determined that Türk Philips Ticaret A.Ş. (“Philips Turkey”) did not abuse its dominant position through denying or delaying access to codes and (...)

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Görkem Yardım, Aydeniz Baytaş The Turkish Supreme Court annuls the Competition Authority’s decision to impose a fine on a manufacturer of personal and home care products for resale price maintenance and clarifies that RPM cases require an element of "coercion" or "incentive" (Henkel)

124

This case summary includes an analysis of the 13th Chamber of the Council of State’s reversal (E. 2021/969, K. 2021/2654, 06.07.2021) of Ankara Regional Administrative Court’s judgment (E. 2020/394, K. 2020/2451, 23.12.2020). Ankara Regional Administrative Court upheld the Turkish Competition (...)

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Kemal Korhan Yıldırım, Hilal Özçelik Güldeste, Aybüke Akdağ, Aydeniz Baytaş The Turkish High State Court upholds the Competition Authority’s non-fining decision by implementing the non bis in idem principle (Mey İçki / Antalya Alkollü / Efe Alkollü)

446

Introduction In April 2016, the Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) launched an investigation against Mey İçki San. ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Mey İçki”), a subsidiary of Diageo plc. The investigation aimed to explore the validity of the allegations regarding Mey İçki`s abuse of dominance in the Turkish (...)

Books

Send a message