FAS finds that refusal to conclude an agency agreement is a violation
“Russian Post” restricted competition by refusing to grant an alternative operator access to the postal service infrastructure and, accordingly, to the market
On 13 April 2017, FAS found that “Russian Post” Federal State Unitary Enterprise violated the antimonopoly law (Clause 5 Part 1 Article 10 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”).
The case was opened upon failure of “Russian Post” to execute a warning issued by FAS following an investigation of a complaint of “FPS” Ltd. about the refusal to conclude an agency agreement for technological operation of carriage and delivery (serving) domestic letter-post items in the Russian Federation.
FAS established that “Russian Post” unreasonably avoided an agency agreement for technological operation of carriage and delivery (serving) domestic letter-post items in the Russian Federation in spite of economic and technological possibilities.
Deputy Head of FAS Anatoly Golomolzin pointed out: “Non-discriminatory access to the market of postal services is a necessary condition for competition. Europe already has such access and it is especially pressing in Russia since, in view of our distances and specifics of settlements, creating a doubling “last mile” infrastructure – a network of postal service branches is economically inefficient. Alternative operators interacting with “Russian Post” on non-discriminatory conditions compensate the necessary costs for infrastructure performance and development”.
“Russian Post” restricted competition by refusing to grant an alternative operator access to the postal service infrastructure and, accordingly, to the market
On 13 April 2017, FAS found that “Russian Post” Federal State Unitary Enterprise violated the antimonopoly law (Clause 5 Part 1 Article 10 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”).
The case was opened upon failure of “Russian Post” to execute a warning issued by FAS following an investigation of a complaint of “FPS” Ltd. about the refusal to conclude an agency agreement for technological operation of carriage and delivery (serving) domestic letter-post items in the Russian Federation.
FAS established that “Russian Post” unreasonably avoided an agency agreement for technological operation of carriage and delivery (serving) domestic letter-post items in the Russian Federation in spite of economic and technological possibilities.
Deputy Head of FAS Anatoly Golomolzin pointed out: “Non-discriminatory access to the market of postal services is a necessary condition for competition. Europe already has such access and it is especially pressing in Russia since, in view of our distances and specifics of settlements, creating a doubling “last mile” infrastructure – a network of postal service branches is economically inefficient. Alternative operators interacting with “Russian Post” on non-discriminatory conditions compensate the necessary costs for infrastructure performance and development”.