Partner Amir Begdesenov commented at kursiv.kz on the initiation of an antitrust investigations
Partner Amir Begdesenov commented at kursiv.kz on the initiation of an antitrust investigation into allegations against the Kazakhstan Ministry for Investment and Development that constituteanticompetitive practices of government authorities.
For more details please see: http://www.kursiv.kz/news/vlast/v-otnosenii-ministerstva-po-investiciam-i-razvitiu-rk-provoditsa-rassledovanie/.
SZP Partner Amir Begdesenov commented at kursiv.kz on the ongoing antitrust investigations in relation to Kazakhstan Temir Zholy National Company JSC and Air Astana JSC, where he noted that since the beginning of 2016 the Register of Dominants has been covering only regulated markets Therefore, many price regulated markets have fallen out of this category. Nevertheless, the regulator still has an instrument to accuse market players of the abuse of their dominant position through monopolistic price-fixing. The Air Astana case is a classic example of such approach. We perceive this case as a message to all businesses which used to be on the Register but were stricken off following the developments in legislation. Such businesses are still exposed to the risk. However, most probably, the fact of earlier registration with the Register might be used by the antitrust regulator as sufficient evidence of the dominance of a certain business without having to analyze the market. In such case, the businesses should keep in mind that the definition of “dominant position” changed in 2016 and they are highly recommended to insist on a full-scale market analysis.
For more details please see: http://www.kursiv.kz/news/vlast1/uristy-prokommentirovali-konflikt-kompanij-s-antimonopolnym-komitetom/.
SZP Partner Amir Begdesenov also commented at kursiv.kz on the InDriver service blocking in Kazakhstan. Officially, the access to InDriver service in Kazakhstan was restricted due to the violation of motor vehicle and communications laws. Blocking one service and allowing others (e.g. Uber, Yandex.Taxi, Aparu, EST, etc.) may be considered asanticompetitive practices of government authoritieswhich are prohibited under Article 194.1 of the Entrepreneurial Code.
For more details please see: http://www.kursiv.kz/thumb/fresh1477538798.pdf.