12-04-2019 | 13:35

“R.I.P.” leases premises in the crematorium mortuary free-of-charge to the “Forensic Medical Examination Bureau” state entity and in return gets the priority access to information about potential customers if its services in breach of the antimonopoly law


Arbitration Court of the Northwestern District pronounced legitimacy and reasonableness of the decision made by St Petersburg OFAS against “Forensic Medical Examination Bureau” St Petersburg State Budgetary healthcare Entity and “R.I.P.” Ltd.


Earlier, the antimonopoly body found that:


– By an order of the Property Relations Committee, the premises in the crematorium mortuary (Build. A., 12, Shafirovsky Ave., St Petersburg) are possessed by “Funeral Services” State Unitary Enterprise on the basis of economic management rights;


– The unitary enterprise leases these premises to “R.I.P.” Ltd.;


“R.I.P.” provides some of these premises and equipment in them free-of-charge to the Forensic Medical Examination Bureau. The company and the Bureau have entered into a contract. The Forensic Medical Examination Bureau is founded by St Petersburg in the person of the Property Relations Committee. The Bureau’s activities are coordinated by the Healthcare Committee.


Thus, “R.I.P.” leases the premises as well as equipment – dissection tables, corpse storage racks, and refrigerator compartments – in the crematorium mortuary to the Forensic Medical Examination Bureau free-of-charge.


Such actions in fact constitute payment for the right to have access to information about potential service customers, which given an advantage to “R.I.P.” in their business operation in comparison with other participants of the funeral services market, which is contrary to Part 4 Article 16 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” *.


The decision of the antimonopoly body was appealed.


The Court of First Instance supported St Petersburg OFAS but the Appeal Court took the side of the economic entity. The Cassation Court reversed the ruling of the Appeal Court and fully recognized legitimacy and reasonableness of the decision issued by the antimonopoly authority.



* Part 4 Article 16 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” prohibits competition-restricting agreements or concerted actions by the authorities and economic entities if such agreements result in restricting access to the market.


Site Map

News & Events Press Releases Media Releases Image Library About the FAS Russia What We Do General Information Mission, Goals, Values Priority Setting Institutional Memory Stakeholders Engagement Center for Education and Methodics Our History Our Structure Powers of Head and Deputy Heads Our Ratings GCR Using our website International Cooperation Treaties & Agreements International Working Groups Working Group on Research of Competition Issues in the Market of International Telecommunications (Roaming) Meetings Working Group for Studying Competition Problems in the Pharmaceutical Sector Concept Note Meetings OECD Competition Committee OECD meetings 2013 OECD meetings 2014 OECD meetings 2015 OECD meetings 2016 OECD meetings 2017 OECD meetings 2018 FAS Annual Reports OECD-GVH RCC RCC Newsletter ICAP Council on Advertising Headquarters for Joint Investigations UNCTAD 13th session IGE UNCTAD Resolution Russian contributions 14th session IGE UNCTAD Resolution Russian contributions 15th session IGE UNCTAD 16th session IGE UNCTAD 17th session IGE UNCTAD EEU Model Law on Competition ICN BRICS WG (Markets of Social Importance) EU APEC Competition Policy and Law Group Annual meetings Projects ERRA Full Members Organizational Structure Archive Working Group on Investigating Issues on Pricing in the Oil and Oil Product Markets and Methods of their Functioning Meetings Document Library Legislation Reports & Analytics Cases & decisions Contacts Give feedback Contact us Links Authorities Worldwide