Ms. Ceren Özkanlı Samlı is a competition lawyer. She graduated from Başkent University, Faculty of Law in 2008. She obtained her LL.M. degree in International Trade Law and Business Law from Liverpool John Moores University in 2010. She was admitted to the Istanbul Bar in 2011. Ceren has joined ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law in the same year. Ceren has extensive experience in all areas of competition law including merger control and cartel investigations conducted by the Turkish Competition Board. Ceren has represented various multinational and national companies before the Turkish Competition Authority in their mergers and acquisitions filings and cartel investigations concerning various sectors. She is fluent in English.
70
In 2019 and 2020, Turkish administrative courts handed down noteworthy judgments concerning two particular decisions of the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”). In both of these cases, namely the (i) Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Pazarlama ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Sahibinden”) judgment rendered by the Ankara (...)
63
Upon the Ankara 7 th Administrative Court’s annulment its 2016 decision , the Competition Board (“Board”) re-examined the allegations against Siemens Healthcare Sağlık A.Ş. (“Siemens”) concerning abuse of dominance by way of excluding the competitors, engaging in discriminatory practices, and (...)
44
On February 13, 2020, the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) initiated a preliminary investigation upon the complaints received from Samuklar Motorlu Araçlar Madencilik İnş. San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.’s (“Samuklar”), which previously worked as the dealer of Brisa Bridgestone Sabancı Lastik San. ve Tic. (...)
145
Background In 2012, the Board launched a full-fledged investigation against Türk Telekom and TTNET upon the complaints of certain Internet service providers (“ISP”), alleging that Türk Telekom and TTNET had abused their dominant positions in the wholesale and retail markets for fixed broadband (...)
56
This case summary includes an analysis of 13th Chamber of the Council of State’s (“Council of State”) decision (E. 2019/1035, K. 2019/4253, 11.12.2019) concerning the last stop of the judicial review. In the judicial review process, Batisöke Söke Çimento Sanayii T.A.Ş. (“Batısöke”) filed to annul (...)
57
This case summary includes an analysis of Ankara 11th Administrative Court’s (the “Administrative Court”) decision (24.10.2019, E. 1315, K. 2115) in which the Administrative Court annulled the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) decision (15-28/317-95, 07.07.2015) due to the incomplete (...)
314
This case summary includes an analysis of Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) BFIT preliminary investigation decision (07.02.2019, 19-06/64-27) in which the Board evaluated non-compete and no-poaching obligations imposed by Bfit Sağlık ve Spor Yatırım ve Tic. A.Ş. (“BFIT”) to its franchisees. (...)
486
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Aygaz decision dated 16.11.2016 with No. 16-39/659-294. The Board assessed allegations that Aygaz and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Mogaz A.Ş. (“Mogaz”), had engaged in resale price maintenance (“RPM”). Background The Board initiated (...)
595
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) TÜPRAŞ decision of 16.03.2016, No. 16-10/159-70. The Board reviewed the allegations of abuse put forward by Akaryakıt Ana Dağıtım Şirketleri Derneği (“ADER”) against Türkiye Petrol Rafinerileri A.Ş. (“TÜPRAŞ”). TÜPRAŞ allegedly abused its (...)
1608
In Turkey, non-compete obligations may be evaluated under the scope of “agreements that restrict competition” or “abusive conducts of dominant undertakings” (Article 4 and 6 of Law No. 4054 on Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”), akin to Article 101 and 102 of TFEU, respectively). However, (...)
19 avenue Jean Aicard
75011 Paris, France
106 West 32nd Street, Suite 144
New York, NY, 10001, USA
563 Chiswick High Road
W4 3AY London, UK
