Raport anual 2010 - Consiliul Concurenţei

COMPETITION COUNCIL
The Competition Council filed an appeal, which was admitted by the High Court of
Cassation and Justice.
The Court stated that the dominant position of the Kronospan group has facilitated
the abuse of ronospan Sepal in terms of “group effect”, the dominant position being
finally attributed to Kronospan Sepal.
The High Court of Cassation and Justice has concluded that the inequity of the price
imposition was demonstrated by the competition authority through its decision,
stating that Kronospan Sepal has abused its dominant position by increasing
substantially the price of its products for no justifiable economic reasons. Kronospan
Sepal has imposed this increase to its beneficiaries as a result of the financial pressure
exercised over them. Thereby, the negotiation was excluded and proven by the refusal
to deal with the beneficiaries.
For these reasons, the High Court of Cassation and Justice has concluded that, in the light
of the analysis conducted by the Competition Council through the challenged decision, the
first Court has reached a wrong conclusion in respect to classification of the offense.
2010 Annual Report 89