Zasada proporcjonalności przy wymierzaniu kar pieniężnych za naruszenie przepisów prawa konkurencji. Analiza metody obliczania wysokości kar pieniężnych nakładanych na przedsiębiorstwa na przykładzie Unii Europejskiej, Turcji oraz Polski
The principle of proportionality in calculating fines for competition law violations. Analysis of the fine calculation method in the EU, Turkey and Poland

Summary/Abstract: This paper analyses the compatibility with the principle of proportionality and the principle of fine individualisation of the fine calculation methodology used under Article 106 of the Polish Competition and Consumer Protection Act. According to established CJEU jurisprudence, when calculating a fine it is possible to refer to either the company’s entire turnover, which indicates the company’s market power, or to the amount gained from sales of products covered by the infringement. It is apparent from CJEU jurisprudence that although Article 23(2) of Regulation No. 1/2003 leaves the Commission discretion as to setting the amount of fines, it nevertheless also limits the exercise of that discretion by establishing objective criteria to which the Commission must adhere. Hence, the amount of a competition law fine is subject to a quantifiable and absolute ceiling in the EU, with the result being that the its maximum amount can be determined in advance. The exercise of that discretion is also limited by the rules of conduct which the Commission imposed upon itself, in particular in the 2006 Guidelines. Point 13 of the 2006 Guidelines states, ‘[i]n determining the basic amount of the fine to be imposed, the Commission will take the value of the undertaking’s sales of goods or services to which the infringement directly or indirectly... relates in the relevant geographic area within the EEA’. By contrast, the UOKiK President in his/her decision-making practice calculates the fine by taking into account a company’s entire turnover from the preceding financial year. This methodology often results in unreasonably high fines that are challenged and later reduced by the courts. Judges frequently state that in light of the principle of proportionality and individualization of fines, there is a need when setting individual fines to refer solely to that undertaking’s revenue from the sale of the goods or services from the relevant market covered by the anticompetitive practice.

• Details
• Contents