Ceren Özkanlı Samlı

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

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.

Linked author

ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)

Articles

1339 Bulletin

Ceren Özkanlı Samlı, Gönenç Gürkaynak The Turkish Competition Board finds no-poaching clauses in a gym company’s franchising agreements to be against competition law (BFIT)

234

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. (...)

Ceren Özkanlı Samlı, Gönenç Gürkaynak The Turkish Competition Board publishes its reasoned decision on the investigations conducted upon the allegation of resale price fixing in the auto gas market (Aygaz)

377

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 (...)

Ceren Özkanlı Samlı, Gönenç Gürkaynak The Turkish Competition Board concludes that a new turnover rebate system does not constitute an abuse of dominance in the fuel wholesale market (Tüpraş / Ader)

546

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 (...)

Ceren Özkanlı Samlı, Gönenç Gürkaynak The Turkish Competition Board confirms that the geographical scope of an ancillary restraint should be limited to the “area of operation of the seller before the transaction and its natural sales hinterland" (Cementeire Aldo Barbetti / Çimko)

182

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, (...)

Send a message