


Gönenç Gürkaynak
Dr. Gönenç Gürkaynak is the founding partner of ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law, a leading law firm of 95 lawyers based in Istanbul, Turkey. He is also an academician, teaching law & economics, and competition law at undergraduate and graduate levels at the University College London (UCL) Faculty of Laws as an honorary professor and at Bilkent University Faculty of Law in Turkey as a visiting professor.
Dr. Gürkaynak graduated from Ankara University Faculty of Law in 1997 and was called to the Istanbul Bar in 1998. Dr. Gürkaynak received his LL.M. degree from Harvard Law School and his Doctor of Philosophy in Law (Ph.D.) degree from UCL Faculty of Laws. Before founding ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law in 2005, Dr. Gürkaynak worked as an attorney at the Istanbul, New York, and Brussels offices of a global law firm for more than eight years. In addition to his membership to the Istanbul Bar since 1998, he was admitted to the American Bar Association in 2002 ; New York Bar in 2002 (currently non-practicing ; registered) ; Brussels Bar in 2003–2004 (B List ; not maintained) ; Law Society of England & Wales in 2004 (currently non-practicing ; registered).
In addition to his continuing private practice as an attorney, primarily through ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law in Istanbul, Dr. Gürkaynak is an honorary professor of practice at UCL Faculty of Laws in London. In addition to his academic role at University College London, he also teaches competition law at Bilkent University Faculty of Law in Ankara since 2005, and he has taught competition law in more than ten universities in Turkey, the EU, the UK, and the US in the last eighteen years.
Dr. Gürkaynak is also a senior research fellow at the Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES) at UCL Faculty of Laws.
Dr. Gürkaynak frequently speaks at international conferences and symposia on competition law matters. He has authored four books and over 80 academic articles published in refereed international law journals.
Distinctions
Auteurs associés
24450 | Évènements



Articles
41466 Bulletin
574
This Special Issue aims to provide detailed insight into the contemporary approaches adopted by the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”), the decisional body of the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) regarding anticompetitive agreements, unilateral conduct and mergers. The approaches adopted by the Board in its recent precedent are heavily influenced by global trends such as the close scrutiny over digital players as well as increasing attention towards competition law issues concerning labour markets. The substantive analysis regarding the anticompetitive agreements, unilateral conduct, and mergers has been shaped by Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) as well as the secondary legislation. Further to Law No. 4054, there are several mechanisms for the Authority to focus on and to streamline certain of its processes, such as the use of the de minimis principle in its cases, “significant impediment of effective competition” (“SIEC”) test for merger control, behavioural and structural remedies for anti-competitive conducts, and procedural tools including leniency, commitment and settlement mechanisms. The articles within this Special Issue aim to reveal and explain the evolving efforts of the Board in establishing its case law in light of the amendments to the main and secondary legislation by way of also following global trends, as well as taking advantage of the well-established practices under the EU competition law regime in recent years, on various fronts.
42
This case summary aims to offer insight into POTAS Decision (“Decision”) of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”). In the Decision, the Board examined the POTAS Akdeniz Akaryakıt Dağıtım AŞ’s (“POTAS”) acquisition of rights to construct and operate fuel supply and storage facilities owned (...)
14
Introduction Earlier this year, the Turkish Competition Board evaluated allegations that DSM Grup Danışmanlık İletişim ve Satış Ticaret AŞ (Trendyol) violated article 6 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (Law No. 4054). Trendyol had been accused of abusing its market power in (...)
26
This case summary aims to offer insight regarding the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Chamber of Electrical Engineers Decision (“Decision”), where the Board assessed whether a group of electrical engineers who are members of the Chamber of Electrical Engineers, District Representation in (...)
39
This case summary aims to offer insight into the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) BSH Decision (“Decision”), where the Board assessed whether BSH Ev Aletleri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“BSH”) violated Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) by way of (...)
44
This case summary aims to offer insight into the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) TODEB decision, where the Board assessed whether negative clearance or individual exemption can be granted to the Data Transfer System (“DTS”) developed by the Payment and Electronic Money Institutions (...)
39
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) FTR decision (“Decision”) in which the Board determined that the agreement (“Agreement”), executed between the undertakings operating in the furniture market in Turkey (“Parties”) with respect to the formation (...)
483
Introduction On 4 March 2021, the Turkish Competition Board initiated an investigation to establish whether Arnica Pazarlama AŞ (Arnica), a supplier of small home appliances, had violated article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (Law No. 4054) through : resale price (...)
584
Introduction The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) initiated in September 2022 a preliminary investigation against Krea İçerik Hizmetleri ve Prodüksiyon A.Ş. (“Krea”), a company holding exclusive broadcasting rights of the Turkish Super League and Turkish First Division League football (...)
106
This article aims to provide a case analysis of the Ankara 8th Regional Administrative Court’s (“Regional Court”) judgement annulling Ankara 13th Administrative Court’s (“Administrative Court”) judgement that annulled the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Johnson&Johnson Sıhhi Malzeme (...)
68
Introduction On 30 July 2021, Monsanto Gıda ve Tarım Tic Ltd Şti (Monsanto), a manufacturer of agricultural and vegetable seeds, herbicides and digital agricultural products, applied to the Turkish Competition Authority for the grant of negative clearance or exemption in favour of the (...)
125
I. Introduction The Competition Board (“Board”) launched a full-fledged investigation against Arçelik Pazarlama AŞ (“Arçelik”), BSH Ev Aletleri San. ve Tic. AŞ (“BSH”), Gürses Kurumsal Tedarik ve Elektronik Tic. Paz. AŞ (“Gürses Kurumsal”), LG Electronics Tic. AŞ (“LG”), Samsung Electronics (...)
45
BSH Ev Aletleri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“BSH”), operating in Turkey under the Bosch and Siemens brands, as well as the local brand Profilo and the private brand Gaggenau, is active in the production, import, export, domestic distribution, and marketing of small and large household appliances, (...)
680
The Turkish Competition Authority has continued its investigations into alleged anti-competitive practices in digital markets. This time, the Competition Board (the Authority’s decision-making body) has launched a fully fledged investigation against Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Paz ve Tic (...)
142
This article has been nominated for the 2023 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. I. Introduction The Turkish Competition Authority (“ Authority ”) has published its Nadirkitap decision in which it evaluated the allegation as to whether (...)
591
The approaches adopted by the Turkish Competition Board in its recent precedent are heavily influenced by the global trends such as the close scrutiny over digital players as well as increasing attention towards competition law issues concerning labour markets. The substantive analysis regarding the anticompetitive agreements, unilateral conduct, and mergers has been shaped by and adjusted to the recent comprehensive amendments to Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) as well as the secondary legislation. Amendments to Law No. 4054, which entered into force on June 24, 2020, introduced several mechanisms for the Authority to focus on and to streamline certain of its processes, such as the use of the de minimis principle in its cases, a new substantive test for merger control, behavioural and structural remedies for anti-competitive conduct, and procedural tools including commitments and settlement mechanism. The articles within this Special Issue aim to reveal and explain the evolving efforts of the Board in establishing its own case law in light of the amendments to the main and secondary legislation by way of also following global trends, as well as taking advantage of the well-established practices under the EU competition law regime in recent years, on various fronts.
55
Do you think the information requested from the Competition Authority is not available in your company records ? Check It Twice ! The Competition Board Fines Martı İleri Teknoloji AŞ for Providing False/Misleading Information* The Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ") imposed an (...)
99
Introduction In June 2022, the Turkish Competition Board delivered its final judgment and announced that the investigation against Olka Spor Malzemeleri Ticaret AŞ (Olka) and Marlin Spor Malzemeleri Ticaret AŞ (Marlin), two undertakings active in the sports equipment sector, had ended with a (...)
72
Introduction On 2 June 2022, the Turkish Competition Board unconditionally approved the indirect acquisition of sole control over Airties Kablosuz İletişim San ve Dış Tic AŞ (Airties) by Providence Managing Member LLC’s (Providence’s) wholly-owned indirect subsidiary, P8 Holding 2 Sàrl (P8 (...)
541
The Ankara 9th Administrative Court (“Administrative Court”) annulled the decision of the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) where an administrative fine of TL 11,214,051.26 was imposed on Hicri Ercili Deniz Nakliyat Kimyevi Maddeler San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (“Hicri Ercili”), a supplier of the (...)
56
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) imposed administrative monetary fines against Transorient Uluslararası Taşımacılık ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“Transorient”) and Tunaset Biofarma Lojistik Hizmetleri A.Ş. (“Tunaset”) for engaging in anticompetitive customer allocation agreements, while Biopharma (...)
191
This case summary aims to offer insight on the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Yemek Sepeti Decision (“Decision”), whereby the Board examined the allegation that Yemek Sepeti Elektronik İletişim Perakende Gıda Lojistik A.Ş. (“Yemek Sepeti”) had abused its dominant position, violating (...)
1717
(1) Introduction On March 4, 2022 the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) published the Communiqué No. 2022/2 on the Amendment of Communiqué No. 2010/4 on the Mergers and Acquisitions Subject to the Approval of the Competition Board (the “Amendment Communiqué”). The Amendment (...)
95
This case summary includes an analysis of the Ankara 2nd Administrative Court’s (“the Court of First Instance”) Sahibinden SoE decision (E. 2022/254, 15.04.2022) in which the Court of First Instance stays of execution of the Board’s decision where the Board imposed an administrative monetary (...)
823
Communiqué No. 2022/2 on the Amendment of Communiqué No. 2010/4 (“ Communiqué No. 2010/4 ”) on the Mergers and Acquisitions Subject to the Approval of the Competition Board (“ Amendment Communiqué ”) has been published on the Official Gazette on March 4, 2022 and will enter into force on May (...)
75
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) conditionally approved the acquisition of sole control over Ferro Corporation (“Ferro”) by American Securities LLC (“American Securities”) through its solely controlled affiliate ASP Prince Holdings Inc. (“Prince”). The Board determined that the (...)
914
(1) Introduction On January 19, 2022, Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) has published a highly anticipated decision of the Competition Board (“Board”) regarding the investigation against retail grocery chains and suppliers of such chains, active in the fields of retail food and (...)
351
The Turkish Competition Authority Evaluates a Request from Modanisa for an Individual Exemption or Negative Clearance for the Settlement Agreement Regarding Restricting on Branded Keyword Bidding* This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) (...)
350
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) decided that Şişecam, through its subsidiary Çevre Sistemleri, has abused its dominant position in the market for glass manufacturing, by way of excluding its competitors in the upstream market for recycled glass, utilized its buyer power to narrow the (...)
543
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Trendyol Interim Measure decision in which the Board, upon the findings of its preliminary investigation, determined that DSM Grup Danışmanlık İletişim ve Satış Ticaret A.Ş.’s (“Trendyol”) use of algorithms and (...)
81
Background On September 29, 2020, a complaint was brought to the Turkish Competition Authority’s (“Authority”) attention, where it was alleged that Arnica Pazarlama A.Ş.’s (“Arnica”) sales representative had called the complainant (who was one of Arnica`s authorized sellers, engaged in the (...)
447
The changes to the Law No. 4054 on Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4045”) introducing the new commitment and settlement mechanisms, entered into force on 24 June 2020 with the Amendment Law, aiming to achieve efficiency gains and allow the competition investigations to close at an earlier (...)
540
The Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) launched a full-fledged investigation against Türk Philips A.Ş (“Philips Turkey”) into allegations of abuse of dominance through denying or delaying access to codes and activation tools required for the maintenance and repair of medical imaging (...)
145
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 (...)
240
Introduction Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition prohibits the fixing of : the purchase or sale price of goods or services ; elements such as cost and profit that form price ; and any other terms of purchase or sale. On 24 August 2021, the Competition Authority (...)
793
After an investigation process of 8 months, the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) announced on August 9, 2021 on its website that it has concluded the investigation with a settlement decision which constitutes the first example of the newly introduced settlement procedure by the Turkish (...)
399
Introduction On July 15, 2021, the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) issued the Regulation on Settlement Procedure for Investigations on Anticompetitive Agreements, Concerted Practices, Decisions and Abuse of Dominant Position (“Settlement Regulation”), which was also published in (...)
250
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 (...)
31
The Turkish Competition Authority (the "Authority") published its Obilet/Biletal decision where it conditionally approved the acquisition of Biletal İç ve Dış Ticaret A.Ş.’s (“Biletal”) sole control by Obilet Bilişim Sistemleri A.Ş. (“Obilet”) and decided that the proposed transaction would (...)
313
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Turkish Airlines and Kuveyt Turk exemption decision in which the Board determined that the "THY Frequent Flyer Program Miles&Smiles Credit Card Cooperation Agreement" (“Agreement”) cannot be issued a (...)
387
On April 20, 2021, the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) announced on its website that the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) had launched a full-fledged investigation against thirty-two undertakings for gentlemen’s agreements in labor markets across Turkey, in order to determine (...)
185
This case summary aims to shed light on the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) DYO Decision, whereby the Board imposed an administrative fine of TL 21,036,866.58 to DYO Boya Fabrikaları Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“DYO”), a major paint supplier in Turkey, on the ground that DYO has violated (...)
201
On 15 April 2021, the Competition Board (the Board) unconditionally approved Regal Beloit Corporation’s acquisition of sole control over Rexnord Corporation’s process and motion control (PMC) business segment. Facts The transaction concerns an acquisition carried through reverse Morris (...)
193
I Introduction On July 29, 2019 a complaint was brought to the Turkish Competition Authority’s (“Authority”) attention, which alleged that certain undertakings operating in the welding sector acted together and subsequently violated the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law (...)
411
In an effort to take one step further in harmonizing the Turkish Competition Law with the EU legislation, the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) has recently introduced the settlement mechanism under Article 43 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) and (...)
515
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 (...)
766
In September 2011, the Turkish Competition Authority (the “Authority”) initiated a preliminary investigation against Mey İçki, a subsidiary of Diageo plc. in order to decide whether it violated Article 6 of Law No. 4054 on Protection of Competition (“Law No.4054”) in the Turkish market for (...)
360
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) decided that Novartis and Roche violated Article 4 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) by way of engaging in concerted practice to expand the use of Lucentis as opposed to Altuzan, both of which are the drugs used for (...)
505
Introduction The Competition Board recently announced its decision to launch a fully fledged investigation, ex officio, against Facebook Inc, Facebook Ireland Ltd, WhatsApp Inc and WhatsApp LLC (together, ’Facebook’) in order to assess whether they had violated Article 6 of Law 4054 on the (...)
165
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) SBM decision in which the Board evaluated Sigorta Bilgi ve Gözetim Merkezi’s (Insurance Information and Monitoring Center) (“SBM”) request for individual exemption or negative clearance for the payment method (...)
212
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 (...)
361
1. Introduction The draft Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Contestable and Fair Markets in the Digital Sector (Digital Markets Act) (“DMA Proposal”) was announced by the European Commission (“Commission”) on December 15, 2020. The DMA Proposal envisages the (...)
128
Introduction On February 23, 2021, the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) has published seminal judgments of the 13th Chamber of the Council of State (“Council of State”). These are landmark decisions that upheld the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) analysis within the scope (...)
184
At the end of 2020, the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) finalized its assessment on the investigation regarding the price increases in the fertilizer industry, conducted against six undertakings active in the fertilizer manufacturing market in Turkey to determine whether the relevant (...)
174
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, (...)
276
On January 24, 2020, Türkiye İş Makinaları Distribütörleri ve İmalatçıları Birliği (“IMDER”), an association of undertakings active in distribution and production of construction equipment, applied to the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) for a negative clearance or an individual (...)
224
The Factors Affecting the Use of Essential Facilities Doctrine in Light of the Lithuanian Railway v Commission Decision : A Comparison with the Turkish Practice and Potential Implications 1) Introduction On November 18, 2020, the General Court of the European Union (“General Court”) upheld (...)
653
This Special Issue presents a collection of significant merger precedents issued by the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”), the decisional body of the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”), in recent years. The primary goal of this compilation is to offer useful insights on the Board`s approach to merger review, by way of providing a collection of illustrative examples on various trending topics in terms of the Board’s assessment and enforcement practices with respect to merger control.
124
(1) Introduction The Guidelines on Examination of Digital Data during On-site Inspections (“Guidelines”), which was recently published by the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”), specifically refer to the procedure to be followed when the case handlers encounter situations calling (...)
169
(1) Introduction In 2018, in its Enerjisa decision, the Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) had imposed administrative fines amounting to a total of TRY 143 million on three retail electricity sales companies (namely AYESAŞ, BAŞKENT and TOROSLAR) (together, the “ RESCs ”) and one (...)
292
This case summary includes an analysis of the Ankara 13th Administrative Court’s (the “Court”) judgment, where the Court reviewed and annulled the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) decision to close its preliminary investigation conducted against Duru Bulgur Gıda San. Tic. A.Ş. (“Duru (...)
178
The Court of Justice of the European Union (“ CJEU ”), in its recent decision with regard to the two joint cases (C‐807/18 and C‐39/19) brought before it for preliminary ruling, addressed how incompatibility with net neutrality shall be assessed under the relevant legislation regarding open (...)
149
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Marport decision in which the Board evaluated the transaction concerning the acquisition of sole control of Marport Liman İşletmeleri Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi (“Marport”) by Terminal Investment Limited (...)
121
On November 5, 2019, Novo Nordisk Sağlık Ürünleri Ticaret Ltd. Şti. (“Novo Nordisk”) applied to the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) for a negative clearance or an individual exemption with respect to a subcontracting agreement with Abdi İbrahim İlaç San. ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Abdi (...)
143
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. (...)
126
(1) Introduction Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Competition Law”) has recently gone through the most comprehensive set of amendments since its initial adoption back in 1994. Law No. 7246 on Amendments to the Law on Protection of Competition (“Amendment Law”), which entered (...)
357
After rounds of revisions and failed attempts of enactment over a span of several years, the proposal for an amendment to the Law No. 4054 on Protection of Competition (“Law no. 4054”) (“Amendment Proposal”) has finally been approved by the Turkish parliament, namely the Grand National (...)
208
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Baymak decision, which concerned an administrative monetary fine of TL 26,813,704.10 against Baymak Makina San. ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Baymak”) for the violation of Article 4 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) (...)
538
The world is clearly going through uncertain times as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. In Turkey, although at the moment there are significantly fewer confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Turkey as compared to the Western European countries and the UK, the COVID-19 pandemic outbrea k has also (...)
218
(1) Introduction The Turkish Competition Board’s (“ Board ”) Yozgat Ready Mixed Cement decision (“ Decision ”) was published on September 7, 2020. The Board concluded that certain ready mixed concrete producers operating in Yozgat province of Turkey entered into a cartel agreement by way of (...)
374
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 (...)
131
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) concluded that Turkcell İletişim Hizmetleri A.Ş. (“Turkcell”) and/or Vodafone Telekomünikasyon A.Ş. (“Vodafone”) did not violate Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) as their conduct did not amount to an anti- competitive (...)
216
The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) published its reasoned decision regarding its preliminary investigation pertaining to the allegations that Hayal Seramik Yapı ve Ürünleri San. Tur. ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Qua Granit”) violated Article 4 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law (...)
148
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) IGA Akaryakıt/THY/Total/Zirve decision, in which the Board evaluated the acquisition of joint control over IGA Havalimanı Akaryakıt Hizmetleri A.Ş.’s (“IGA Akaryakıt”) shares by Türk Hava Yolları A.O. (“THY”), (...)
314
This case note analyses Ankara 6th Administrative Court’s (the “Administrative Court”) annulment judgment (18.12.2019 ; 2019/946 E., 2019/2625 K.) through which the Administrative Court reviewed the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) decision dated 01.10.2018 and numbered 18-36/584-285, (...)
96
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 (...)
169
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Cinven/Vakıf/Barentz decision, in which the Board evaluated the acquisition of joint control over H.L. Barentz B.V. (“ Barentz ”) by (i) an investment fund, which was ultimately controlled by Cinven Capital Management (VI) General Partner (...)
97
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s CNNC Capital/Tongfang decision, regarding the acquisition of sole control over Tsinghua Tongfang Co. Ltd. (“Tongfang”) by China National Nuclear Corporation Capital Holdings Co. Ltd. (“CNNC Capital”). The Board assessed whether the (...)
110
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Van Leeuwen/Benteler decision, in which the Board evaluated the acquisition of sole control over Benteler International Aktiengesellschaft’s (“ Benteler ”) business unit for the distribution of steel pipes (“ (...)
112
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 (...)
899
The articles in this Special Issue aim to demonstrate how the Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) paved the way for the harmonization of the Turkish competition law regime with European Union law over the span of the past decade on various fronts. In a similar vein, these articles also intend to shed light on the contemporary approach adopted by the Board in cases concerning anticompetitive practices, unilateral practices and mergers.
111
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s PayU/iyzico decision, in which the Board analysed the parties’ market powers in the financial technology (“ FinTech ”) market by applying different market share calculation methods and established the general principles for the assessment (...)
230
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Saudi Aramco/Sabic decision, in which the Board focused on whether the two state-owned undertakings belonged to the same economic unit, while also analysing whether competition in the relevant product markets (...)
197
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Akdağ Beton/Şenerler Beton/Saray Beton/Sarıkaya Beton/Üç Yıldırım decision, based on an investigation initiated due to a complaint filed with the Turkish Competition Authority against certain ready-mixed concrete companies that were active (...)
149
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Kerry Logistics/Asav HoldCo decision, where the Board, by taking into consideration the parties’ intention with regards to the acquisition of sole control, evaluated whether or not to tolerate an interim joint control period that would (...)
62
(1) Introduction The decision of the Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) concerning the full-fledged investigation of the Turkish Competition Authority (the “Authority”) against Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Pazarlama ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“Sahibinden.com”) has been unanimously overturned (...)
282
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) Tuborg decision (20.06.2019 ; 19-22/335-152) in which the Board withdrew Tuborg Pazarlama A.Ş.’s (“Tuborg”) individual exemption granted to its agreements containing exclusivity clauses with sellers such as (...)
184
Background The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) has recently published its reasoned decision on an exemption application by Platform Aracılık ve Danışmanlık Ltd. Şti. (“Platform Aracılık”) regarding its sample agreements (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) with five fuel (...)
112
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) Istanbul Customs Brokers Association decision (20.06.2019 ; 19-22/352-158) in which the Board evaluated the allegations raised by Ünsped Gümrük Müşavirliği ve Lojistik Hizmetleri A.Ş (a customs brokerage (...)
90
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Nidec/Embraco decision, regarding the acquisition of sole control over the compressor manufacturing business (“ Embraco ”) of Whirlpool Corporation (“ Whirlpool ”) by Nidec Corporation (“ Nidec ”). Within the scope of its preliminary review (...)
128
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Air France/Virgin Atlantic decision, in which the Board evaluated the acquisition of joint control over Virgin Atlantic Limited (“ VAL ”) by Air France-KLM S.A. (“ AFKL ”), Virgin Group Holding Limited (“ Virgin Group ”), and Delta Air (...)
753
Background Limar Liman ve Gemi İşletmeleri A.Ş. (“Limar”), which is controlled by Arkas Holding A.Ş. (“Arkas”) notified to the Turkish Competition Authority (the “Authority”) its acquisition of the sole control over Mardaş Marmara Deniz İşletmeciliği A.Ş. (“Mardaş” or the “Target”) operating (...)
272
In a preliminary investigation in 2011 on the allegations that Abalıoğlu Yem Soya ve Tekstil A.Ş. (“ Abalıoğlu ”) had exclusivity clauses in its dealership agreements concerning the sales of chicken meat and eggs under “Lezita” brand, the Board had decided that Abalıoğlu had not violated the (...)
502
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 (...)
202
On May 3rd, 2019 the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) published its reasoned decision dated February 7th, 2019 and numbered 19-06/51-18 with respect to the hindering of the on-site inspection conducted in Ege Gübre Sanayii A.Ş. (“Ege Gübre”). The decision concerns the evaluation on whether (...)
346
The Turkish Competition Board published its reasoned decision on an additional investigation on whether Turkcell İletişim Hizmetleri A.Ş. has violated the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition through resale price maintenance and exclusivity practices (19-03/23-10 ; 10.01.2019). The (...)
511
The Ankara 7th Administrative Court (“Court”) annulled the dismissal decision of the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) concerning the allegations that Mastervolt International Holding B.V. (“Mastervolt”) and its exclusive distributor in Turkey, Artı Marin Elektrik Dış Tic. Ltd. Şti. (“Artı (...)
364
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) Sony decision (22.11.2018 ; 18-44/703-345) in which the Board evaluated the allegations concerning resale price maintenance (“RPM”) against Sony Eurasia Pazarlama A.Ş. (“Sony”) upon complaint of a former (...)
140
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) decision of 22 November 2018 numbered 18-44/702-344 in which the Board assessed the allegations that several undertakings–which are all active in the steel guardrail sector in Turkey and members of the Turkish Association of (...)
85
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s MP Hotel decision, in which the Board evaluated the acquisition of sole control over the (i) Magic Life Water World Imperial (“ Magic Life ”) in Antalya, (ii) TUI Blue Marmaris (“ TUI ”) in Muğla, (iii) Bodrum Imperial in Muğla, and (iv) (...)
25
(1) Introduction The reasoned decision of the Turkish Competition Board (the “ Board ”) concerning the preliminary investigation initiated by the Turkish Competition Authority (the “ Authority ”) against four movie producers and their professional union has been published on the official (...)
123
The Turkish Competition Board (" Board ") assessed the creation of two separate JVs by General Electric Company (" GE "), Sumitomo Corporation (" Sumitomo "), Shikoku Electric (" Shikoku "), and Sharjah Asset Management Holding (“ Sharjah ”) for the wholesale trade of electric and the (...)
63
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Jacobs decision, in which the Board evaluated the notification submitted by Jacobs TR, regarding the transaction by and between Jacobs Group, Kasap Family and Jacobs TR, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jacobs Group, which intended to acquire (...)
420
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) recently published Sahibinden.com decision of October 1st, 2018 numbered 18-36/584-285 in which the Board assessed whether Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Paz. ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Sahibinden.com”) –an online platform which acts as an (...)
143
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Luxottica/Essilor decision, in which the Board evaluated the transaction concerning the merger of Luxottica Group S.p.A. (“Luxottica”) and Essilor International Compagnie Générale d’Optique S.A. (“Essilor”). (...)
141
The Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) resolved that the transaction would not be deemed as a concentration requiring mandatory merger control filing before the Turkish Competition Authority (the “ Authority ”), given that the transaction would result in shifting alliances. To that end, the (...)
55
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Thales/Gemalto decision regarding the acquisition of sole control over Gemalto N.V. (“Gemalto”) by Thales S.A. (“Thales”). The Board indicated that the aggregate market share of the parties would be relatively high in the enterprise key (...)
416
The Competition Board recently published its reasoned decision on the application filed by Vodafone Net İletişim Hizmetleri AŞ regarding an agreement signed with Superonline İletişim Hizmetleri AŞ. The agreement concerns Vodafone and Superonline granting each other access to their respective (...)
227
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) recently published Enerjisa decision of 8 August 2018 numbered 18-27/461-224 in which the Board assessed whether Enerjisa and its subsidiaries, all active in the electricity sector in Turkey, violated Article 6 of Law No. 4054 (...)
848
Background The Turkish Competition Board (“Board”) initiated a preliminary investigation on March 8, 2018 (Decision No. 18-07/124-M), in the traffic signalization sector. Subsequently, the Turkish Competition Authority’s (“TCA”) case handlers conducted an on-site inspection on June 5, 2018, (...)
338
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Frito Lay decision, dated 12.06.2018 and numbered 18-19/329-163. The Board has recently published its reasoned decision regarding the preliminary investigation that was launched against Frito Lay Gıda San. Tic. A.Ş. (“Frito (...)
124
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“ Board ”) decision of May 29th, 2018 numbered 18-16/293-146 in which the Board assessed the acquisition of Doğan Müzik Kitap Mağazacılık Pazarlama AŞ (“ D&R ” or “ Target ”) and its two subsidiaries, namely, Hür Servis Sosyal (...)
133
The Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) granted conditional approval to the acquisition of sole control over Monsanto Company (“ Monsanto ”) by Bayer Aktiengesellschaft (“ Bayer ”), by way of taking into account the commitments submitted before the European Commission (“ Commission ”). (...)
309
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) TUÇEF and TURÇEF decision (03.05.2018 ; 18-13/230-105). The Board reviewed the allegations put forward by Berkay Gökçe, a real person, against TURÇEF Yeminli Çevirmenlik Federasyonu (“TURÇEF”) and TUÇEF (...)
298
A. Introduction The Competition Board (“Board”) has recently published its reasoned decision in its reassessment of the Turkish Pharmacists Association (Türk Eczacıları Birliği) (“TPA”) case, following the annulment decision rendered by the 13th Chamber of the High State Court (“High State (...)
1083
The Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) completed its work in progress on revising the Guidelines on Vertical Agreements (“Guidelines”) that was issued based on the Block Exemption Communiqué on Vertical Agreements (“Communiqué No. 2002/2”). It took approximately 2 years for the (...)
274
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Competition Board” or “Board”) Çiçek Sepeti decision (08.03.2018 ; 18-07/111-58). The Board reviewed the allegations put forward by Çiçek Satış A.Ş. (“Çiçek Satış”) against Çiçek Sepeti İnternet Hizmetleri A.Ş. (“Çiçek (...)
328
Upon a number of complaints, the Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) opened an in-depth investigation against Akdeniz Elektrik Dağıtım A.Ş. (“Akdeniz Elektrik”), CK Akdeniz Elektrik Perakende Satış A.Ş. (“CK Akdeniz”) and AK DEN Enerji Dağıtım ve Perakende Satış Hizmetleri (“AK DEN”), (...)
282
Introduction On May 5 2018 the Competition Board published its reasoned decision of February 15 2018 (18- 05/74-40) following its preliminary investigation into allegations that Jotun Boya Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞhad violated Article 4 of Law 4054 on the Protection of Competition. The (...)
116
By way of taking into account another transaction realized by the same acquirer within the same relevant product market previously, the Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) resolved that the contemplated transaction is subject to a mandatory merger control filing, although it does not satisfy (...)
122
The Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) unconditionally approved the acquisition of sole control over Rockwell Collins, Inc. (“ Rockwell ”) by United Technologies Corporation (“ UTC ”) which will be realized by way of a reverse-triangular merger. This case summary concerns an analysis of (...)
65
This case summary concerns an analysis of the Board’s Valeo/FTE Group decision, pertaining to the acquisition of sole control over FTE Group Holding GmbH (“FTE Group”) by Valeo Holding GmbH (“Valeo Germany”). The Board resolved that the transaction would result in a horizontally affected (...)
332
Introduction On January 9 2018 the Competition Board published a reasoned decision dated September 27 2017 (17-30/487-211) following its preliminary investigation into allegations by Doğtaş Kelebek Mobilya San ve Tic AŞ that Yataş Yorgan ve Yatak San ve Tic AŞ had violated Article 4 of Law (...)
398
The Competition Board launched a fully-fledged investigation into 10 ready-mixed concrete companies active in the city of Izmir, which had been accused of undertaking a concerted practice for three months and thus violating Article 4 of Law 4054. Following a 16-month investigation, on August (...)
411
This case summary includes an analysis of the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) BSH decision (22.08.2017 ; 17-27/454-195). The Board reviewed the allegations put forward by Ersan Pazarlama Tic. Ltd. Şti. (“Ersan Pazarlama”) against BSH Ev Aletleri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (“BSH”). The Board (...)
246
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Çekok Gıda decision dated 03.07.2017 and numbered 17-20/318-140. The Board had initiated an ex-officio preliminary investigation and assessed allegations that eight undertakings operating in the Turkish wholesale market for (...)
98
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “ Board ”) Vive B.V./Toyota decision of 6 April 2017 numbered 17-12/143-63 regarding the transaction by which Toyota Industries Corporation (“ TICO ”), through its subsidiary Toyota Industries Europe AB (“ Toyota Europe ”) will (...)
159
“The Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) unconditionally approved the transaction concerning the acquisition of joint control over Cerba Healthcare (“ Cerba ”) by Public Sector Pension Investment Board (“ PSPIB ”) and Partners Group AG (“ Partners Group ”). To that end, the Board resolved (...)
448
Introduction The New Block Exemption Communique 2017/3 for Vertical Agreements in the Motor Vehicle Sector in Turkey was published in the Official Gazette on February 24 2017. Communique 2017/3 revoked the Block Exemption Communique 2005/4 for Vertical Agreements and Concerted Practices in (...)
172
Communique 2017/2 on the Amendment of Communique 2010/4 on Mergers and Acquisitions Subject to the Approval of the Competition Board was published in the Official Gazette on February 24 2017 and entered into force the same day. This update outlines the substantive amendments introduced by (...)
402
This case summary includes an analysis of the annulment decision of 13th Chamber of the High State Court (2010/4617 E., 2016/4241 K) (“High State Court”). The High State Court cancelled the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) decision on parallel export restrictions in vertical (...)
281
Introduction The Competition Board recently published a reasoned decision (December 6 2016 ; 16-42/699-313) following its investigation into whether the Pharmacists’ Association (TEB) and the Pharmacists’ Association Commercial Enterprise (TEBII) had violated Article 6 of Law 4054 on the (...)
552
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 (...)
335
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) Congresium ATO decision dated 27.10.2016 and numbered 16-35/604-269. The Board’s decision comes following the judgment of the Ankara 3rd Administrative Court which annulled the Board’s previous decision with respect to the same (...)
118
This case note analyses the Turkish Competition Board’s (“ Board ”) International Paper Company / Weyerhaeuser decision of 23 September 2016 numbered 16-31/519-233 on the transaction concerning the acquisition of Weyerhaeuser Company’s paper pulp business unit (“ WHPP ”) through the transfer (...)
236
Introduction On April 20 2016 the Turkish Competition Board published reasoned Decision 16-14/205-89, following its preliminary investigation into allegations that Soda Sanayii AŞ had violated : Article 6 of Law 4054 on the Protection of Competition by abusing its dominant position in the (...)
663
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 (...)
115
The Turkish Competition Board’s (the " Board ") assessed the transaction concerning the acquisition of Pirelli Tyre SpA’s (“ Pirelli ”) steel tire cord business by NV Bekaert SA (" Bekaert ") in Turkey. During the Phase II review, the Board evaluated the parties’ market position and the (...)
150
Long-awaited amendments to the Law on Protection of Competition No. 4054 ("Competition Law") became a hot topic when the Turkish Parliament announced that the draft law containing the amendments ("Draft Law") was officially added to the drafts and proposals list. The Prime Ministry sent the (...)
1784
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). (...)
17234 Revue
237
Le 22 juin, la 14e édition de la conférence “Demain la concurrence” a eu lieu à Paris et a été organisée par Concurrences. Cette conférence, qui se tient chaque année à Paris depuis 2009, occupe désormais la première place parmi les événements antitrust indépendants en Europe en ce qui (...)
31
Cette rubrique Livres recense et commente les ouvrages et autres publications en droit de la concurrence, droit & économie de la concurrence et en droit de la régulation. Une telle recension ne peut par nature être exhaustive et se limite donc à présenter quelques publications récentes (...)
1526
Cet article analyse les propositions de renversement de la charge de la preuve dans l’examen des acquisitions par les GAFAM, ainsi que les études expérimentales qui analysent rétrospectivement ces acquisitions. Il constate que ces propositions, qui reposent sur la présomption que les (...)
1084
Abstract Le 21 juin, à Paris, s’est tenue la 13ème édition de la conférence « Nouvelles Frontières de l’Antitrust » organisée par Concurrences. Cette conférence, qui se tient chaque année à Paris depuis 2009, occupe désormais la première place parmi les événements indépendants européens en (...)
2259
Table of contents : The zombie threat in the post-Covid-19 economy : Competition policy implications, Frédéric de Bure, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Paris How can merger control serve de-zombification ?, Gönenç Gürkaynak, Founding Partner, ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law, (...)
1242
Au cours de la dernière décennie, le développement durable s’est imposé comme un point central de la vie économique. Compte tenu de la pression croissante dans ce domaine, les décideurs politiques tentent désormais de mobiliser tous les outils politiques à leur disposition pour atteindre les (...)
1608
Table des matières : Does welfare include the green factor ? Integration of sustainability into competition law, Gönenç Gürkaynak, Founding Partner, ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law, Istanbul, Member of Faculty, Bilkent University Faculty of Law, and Bilgi University Faculty of Law (...)
2505
Dans cette édition, nous présentons une vue d’ensemble du droit de la concurrence dans les pays en développement, puis nous abordons les thèmes des cartels, de la corruption et des concentrations, évoquées lors de la conférence annuelle "Antitrust and developing and emerging economies" (...)
2568
L’innovation peut soit être considérée par les autorités de concurrence comme un paramètre à protéger des potentiels effets négatifs d’une transaction, ou être utilisée par les parties à une concentration comme un argument de défense visant à éliminer ou à atténuer les préoccupations d’effets (...)
1293
La destination finale et le but ultime mis en avant dans notre article est la nécessité pour l’Autorité de la Concurrence Turque de prendre en considération l’innovation dans son contrôle des concentrations en adoptant des outils dynamiques. Ainsi, nous soutenons que l’Autorité de la (...)
503
En partenariat avec la revue Concurrences, l’Ecole de droit de la New York University a organisé, le 28 octobre 2016, la conférence sur la Concurrence et la Mondialisation dans les pays en voie de développement. Les régimes de concurrence et commerciaux ont de nettes différences de degrés de (...)
2378
Les entreprises devraient toutes mettre en place des programmes de conformité au droit de la concurrence pour assurer le respect de ces règles complexes par leurs salariés. Ceci étant, il n’y a guère de cohérence dans la manière dont ces efforts de conformité sont percus par les autorités. (...)
Livres











Statistiques

83150

485.1

173

Classement de l'auteur