SUPREME COURT DREW A LINE ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE DECISION MADE BY SAMARA OFAS

15-04-2019 | 12:47

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused to transfer cassation appeals of “Modern Medical Technologies” Ltd., “G E Healthcare” Ltd. and a former Deputy Minister of Healthcare of the Samara region to the Judicial Collegium on Economic Disputes

 

In February 2017, Samara OFAS established the facts of anticompetitive agreements that resulted in maintaining prices at auctions. The agreements were concluded by Modern Medical Technologies” Ltd., “GE Healthcare” Ltd., “Medsymbol” Ltd., “TsEKh-Zdorovie” Ltd., Serdavin Samara Regional Clinical Hospital and the Ministry of Healthcare of the Samara region.

 

The above entities jointly participated in an open auction for the works on technical maintenance and repair of expensive equipment, 23 medical facilities in the region were the ordering parties. Procurement was organized by Serdavin Samara Regional Clinical Hospital. The initial contract price was 780 million RUB.

 

Later the legal entities were held administratively liable: “Modern Medical Technologies” Ltd. was fined over 26 million RUB; “GE Healthcare” Ltd. – 100,000 RUB.

 

Samara District Court is also considering a criminal; case based on these facts.

 

There are seven accused in the case: a former Deputy Minister of Healthcare of the Samara region, Head of the Medical Equipment Provision Department of the Regional Healthcare Ministry, Director of “Modern Medical Technologies” Ltd. that won the auction, his Deputy and an engineer, and two staff members of “GE Healthcare” Ltd. They are charged under Part 2 Article 204 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (rent-seeking); Part 3 Article 30, Part 2 Article 178 of the Criminal Code (attempts to restrict competition); Part 1 Article 286 УК of the Criminal Code (abuse of office).

 

According to Head of FAS Anti-Cartel Department, Andrey Tenishev, “the case against “Modern Medical Technologies” Ltd., “TsEKh-Zdorovie” Ltd. and other economic entities is a clear example of judicial support of the decisions of the antimonopoly authority. In 2018, the Courts reversed only 4.3% of the total number of the cartel decisions. To compare, in 2017 the figure was 5.7%.

 



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