WSG Czech law firm member Kocián Šolc Balaštík achieves victory for Telefónica O2 in Antimonopoly Office dispute at the Constitutional Court
July, 2007 - Prague 1, Czech Republic
Czech Constitutional Court cancels decisions of Supreme Administrative Court and Antimonopoly Office against Telefónica O2 Czech Republic for alleged abuse of a dominant position
Law firm Kocián Šolc Balaštík (KŠB) successfully represented Eurotel Praha (currently Telefónica O2 Czech Republic) before the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic against the Supreme Administrative Court’s decision in favour of the Antimonopoly Office for alleged abuse of a dominant position.
On 11 July 2007, the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic cancelled on grounds of conflicting with the Czech Constitution the Antimonopoly Office’s decision to impose a fine of CZK 48 million on Eurotel Praha, including the Chairman of the Antimonopoly Office’s confirming decision and the Supreme Administrative Court’s decision rejecting Eurotel Praha’s appeal against these decisions. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic’s resolution is final and the fine of CZK 48 million is to be returned to Telefónica O2.
KŠB partner Pavel Dejl, who represented Eurotel Praha before the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic and in the earlier proceedings, commented the Antimonopoly Office’s fine was imposed illegally from the very beginning due to the fact Eurotel Praha did not have a clear dominant position pursuant to legal regulations the Antimonopoly Office should have applied to the case in question.
The dispute and proceedings should now be definitely terminated since the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic noted in its opinion the Antimonopoly Office had missed all deadlines necessary for newly considering the case and the fine cannot be re-imposed. This is already the second case in which the Antimonopoly Office has been obliged to return fines imposed on clients represented by KŠB. The first case was the fine imposed on Delta Pekárny, a.s. by the Antimonopoly Office’s decision No. S 233A/03-7786/03-ORP, as amended, by the Chairman of the Antimonopoly Office’s decision No. R 3/2004.
