14-05-2019 | 16:30

Udmurtia OFAS opened two cases against “Podrostok” City Prophylactics Centre” Municipal Budgetary Institution, “KromStroi+”, “TechIndustry” and “KromService”, and 6575 military unit for violating the antimonopoly law. The cases are based on the materials obtained during an unscheduled inspection of “KromStroi+” Ltd.


It was found that “KromStroi+” Ltd. had been in electronic communications with a physical person to discuss the timing of filing documents for the electronic auction of “Podrostok” City Prophylactics Centre with 1.1 million RUB initial maximum contract price, and in the course of the second auction practically drafted the technical assignment for the auction at the cost of 1.1 million RUB and drafted local costing that the ordering party included in the auction documentation.


The electronic communication on procurement by the budgetary institution showed that Director of “KromStroi+” Ltd. coordinated the auction documentation with the ordering party prior to publication of the auction documentation, and the same situation – obtaining procurement documentation prior to its official publication - occurred for the auction.


Later on, “KromStroi+”, “TechIndustry” and “KromService” filed bids for participating in the auction of “Podrostok”, and “KromStroi+” and “KromService” participated in the second auction.


Their bids should have been rejected by the Auction Commissions of the ordering parties like they rejected the bids of other participants, yet they were allowed to take part in the auctions.


Based on the auction outcome, contracts were concluded with “KromStroi+”. “TechIndustry” and “KromService” did not take part in the auction because the purpose of filing their bids was to ensure the win by “KromStroi+” Ltd.


As a result of concluding anticompetitive agreements, the ordering parties created advantages for the above companies participating in the auctions, which resulted in restricting, preventing, eliminating competition in the course of procurement. Udmurtia OFAS found that the members of the agreements violated Clause 1 Part 1 Article 17 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”.


Arbitration Court of the Udmurtia Republic confirmed legitimacy of the decisions made by Udmurtia OFAS. The companies and the ordering parties will be held administratively liable.

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