The Competition Authority announced on its website that an investigation has been launched against 7 companies active in the information and communication technology sector. The Authority has conducted a preliminary investigation into the allegation that the undertakings concerned have infringed an article of the Competition Protection Act.

The Law on the Protection of Competition by making gentlemen’s agreements on the labor market.It is contrary to the article ‘Restriction of competition agreements, concerted practices and decisions’. The preliminary investigation, which began with the accusation, was decided by the Competition Council. The 7 companies for which an investigation decision has been made are listed as follows:

Companies that have decided to investigate:

• Etiya Information Technologies Software Industry and Trade Inc.
• Pia Bilisim Hizmetleri A.Ş.
• Innova Information Solutions Inc.
• NETAS Telecommunications Inc.
• MAGIS Technology Inc.
• Caffeine Software Services Tic. IF
• RDC Partner IT Consulting and Technology Services Inc.

The competition authority stated in the announcement that the decision in question was for informational purposes and that the companies in question violated Law No. 4054 and were subject to sanctions. cannot be interpreted expressed. The law with number 4054, which will guarantee the application of sanctions in case the allegations about the companies are correct in the investigation, is as follows:

Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (Article 4)

Agreements between undertakings, concerted practices and similar decisions and acts of associations of undertakings, the object of which is, directly or indirectly, to prevent, distort or restrict competition in a particular market for goods or services, or which have or may cause such an effect. illegal and prohibited.

These cases are in particular:

• a) Determination of the purchase or sale price of goods or services, factors such as costs and profit that constitute the price, and any conditions of purchase or sale,
• b) Dividing the markets for goods or services and sharing or controlling all kinds of market resources or elements,
• c) Control the quantity of supply or demand of goods or services or determine them outside the market,
• d) Difficulty hindering or restricting the activities of rival companies, or taking the companies active in the market out of the market through boycotts or other conduct, or preventing new entrants to the market,
• e) With the exception of exclusive dealership, apply different terms to persons of equal status for equal rights, duties and actions,
• f) Notwithstanding the nature of the contract or business practices, require the purchase of a good or service together with another good or service, or make a good or service requested by buyers acting as intermediaries subject to a to display another good or service by the buyer, or to impose conditions with regard to the re-delivery of a good or service.

In cases where the existence of an agreement cannot be proven, price changes in the market or the balance between supply and demand or the areas of activity of companies are similar to those in markets where competition is impeded, distorted or restricted, that the companies are in agreement constitutes a suspicion. Provided that it is based on economic and rational facts, either party may avoid liability by proving that they did not act in concert.

Who acts prohibited in Articles 4, 6 and 7 of the Act is determined by the board. an administrative fine of a maximum of ten percent of their gross annual income is given.