Court repeals Latvian Competition Council’s record fine

The Administrative Regional Court has repealed the Competition Council’s EUR 7.4 Mio fine on the distributors of VW cars represented by VILGERTS.

This was the highest fine ever imposed by the Competition Council on one group of companies. In the judgment of 22 November, the court found that the Competition Council had failed to prove its case, given, among other things, that the sanctioned actions have not been established as harmful to competition in the case law of the EU courts.

VILGERTS Partner Debora Pāvila: “There is hope now for Latvian competition law. Up to date the decisions of the Competition Council were virtually untouchable. Law cannot develop in such circumstances.”

The Moller group companies were represented by the VILGERTS competition team: Debora Pāvila, Jūlija Jerņeva, Jānis Sarāns and Katrīne Pļaviņa. VILGERTS teamed up with the remarkable economist the late Alfrēds Vanags.

by Debora Pāvila, Partner, Latvia

Related Lawyers

Related Experience

Defended a department store before the Consumer Rights Protection Centre in alleged price display breach for loyal customers.

Helped an energy company to explore ways of overturning the regulators ruling that the transmission system operator was not independent of its shareholders. The main challenge in the case was focusing on the fiduciary duties of the client’s management in managing the company while the shareholders are creating a conflict of interest and compliance risks.

Successfully defending owner of an airport hangar against claim brought by construction company regarding the owner’s refusal to pay for the defective construction works. On 14 January 2019 the district court adopted a judgement in favour of the client, which became effective as of 5 February 2019.

Representing an aviation company in an ongoing litigation regarding the repayment of investments. The company who received the funds later transferred its’ business in several coordinated transactions to a related company, and thereafter became insolvent. The client brought a claim against the recipient of the borrower’s business pursuant to Article 20 of Commercial Law.

Instagram