III SK 10/09
AI generated
Supreme Court dismisses fine for non-compliance, ruling cessation means stopping the practice, not voiding prior contracts.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's cassation appeal against a fine imposed for failing to comply with a competition authority decision. The court held that 'cessation' of an abusive practice requires stopping the conduct itself, not necessarily voiding prior contracts containing the disputed clauses. Consequently, the court found the plaintiff's continued use of old contracts did not constitute non-compliance.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 102 ust. 1 ustawy o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów; Art. 9 ustawy o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów: Cessation of an abusive practice requires the actual discontinuation of the conduct, not merely the removal of its consequences or the invalidation of prior contracts containing the abusive terms.
Keywords
AI generated
competition law
abusive practices
dominant position
non-compliance fine
cessation of practice
contract validity
competition authority
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 102 ust. 1 ustawy z dnia 15 grudnia 2000 r. o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów
Art. 8 ust. 2 pkt 4 ustawy z dnia 15 grudnia 2000 r. o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów
Art. 9 ustawy z dnia 15 grudnia 2000 r. o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów
Art. 8 ust. 3 ustawy z dnia 15 grudnia 2000 r. o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów
Art. 213 § 1 k.p.c.
art. 213 § 1 k.p.c
art. 2 Konstytucji RP
art. 32 Konstytucji RP
art. 3531 k.c
art. 6 k.c
Cited Case Law
AI generatedIII SK 29/04
III SK 17/06