‍The class action lawsuits are looking really promising this time. For businesses, however, they risk consumers collectively pursuing claims that have not yet been worth pursuing individually.

In this context, we would also draw attention to the increased activity of the Office of Consumer Affairs in the distribution of consumer goods, where significant fines have recently been levied.

A decision by the OCC on a fine may also provide a good basis (and guidance) for claims by consumer groups harmed by prohibited conduct. Thus, with the advent of class actions, the fine given by the authority may only end up being the "lesser" concern.

Recently, the OCC has focused on distributors of consumer goods who, through so-called vertical agreements, have enforced minimum prices for their products. In doing so, they illegally restricted price competition and thus harmed not only the sellers, but above all consumers, who had to buy the products at a higher price.

The prohibited conduct consisted not only in contractual arrangements, but also, for example, in the threat to terminate deliveries in the event of a breach of unwritten price rules.

Although the exposed "sinners" subsequently cooperated with the Office and concluded settlement agreements, they still have to pay record fines: ELECTROLUX s.r.o. (distributor of ELECTROLUX, AEG and Zanussi appliances) in the amount of CZK 125.4 million. Groupe SEB s.r.o. (distributor of Krups, Moulinex, Rowenta, Tefal and WMF appliances) in the amount of CZK 72.3 million. CZK and FAST ČR (distributor of brands such as Sencor, Yenkee, Stell and Fieldmann) in the amount of CZK 30.2 million. CZK.

The threat of such a sanction can be avoided by examining the contractual framework of supplier relations and actual business practices. A compliance program is also used to prevent and mitigate the consequences of anti-competitive behavior.

Victims are entitled to compensation: the risk of class actions

In addition to the penalty, the risk of anticompetitive conduct also involves the obligation to pay damages. The current decision of the Competition Authority on anticompetitive conduct is then an important support for the enforcement of these claims.

The sellers may have suffered damage, for example, because they could not sell their stock at a competitive price and may have been forced to write off such goods altogether.

Final consumers who had to buy products at higher prices were also harmed. Until now, consumers could only make such claims individually. However, this is likely to change soon with the expected adoption of the Class Actions Act. It is therefore realistic to expect that with competition infringements, compensation claims will also start to be brought to a greater extent.

If you would like to know more about this, please do not hesitate to contact JUDr. Ing. Vít Švestka and regarding the application of unfair competition claims or compensation for damages to Mgr. Martin Tůma, Ph.D.

‍

‍

We used a publicly available AI translation tool to translate this article from Czech to English. Please contact us if any of the above information is unclear to you.