419 / 469
LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS
405
Bankası T.A.O. and Yapı ve Kredi Bankası A.Ş., which operate in
the banking market, to determine whether the aforementioned Act
was infringed by the above undertakings through colluding as part
of a so-called “gentleman’s agreement” to not offer promotions
to private firms and for the other banks to not extend offers to
those institutions/firms for which the protocols are continuing;
and as concerns 6 of the above banks, through colluding and
predetermining the promotion amount that they would bid in the
tender by Erdemir T.A.Ş. for 2005 salary payments. The Board
decided that Akbank T.A.Ş., Türkiye Garanti Bankası A.Ş.,
Türkiye İş Bankası A.Ş., Koçbank A.Ş., Pamukbank A.Ş., Yapı
ve Kredi Bankası A.Ş. and Türkiye Vakıflar Bankası T.A.O., as
of 2001; Finans Bank A.Ş., as of 2004; and Denizbank A.Ş., as
of 2005, infringed competition under Article 4 of Act No. 4054
through the abovementioned act, that these undertakings will be
given an administrative fine of 4 thousandths of the annual gross
revenues that accrued by the end of the fiscal year 2010, and that
although it was established that Koçbank A.Ş. and Pamukbank
A.Ş. were part of the agreement during 2001 and 2002, because
the five-year time limit provided under the abolished Article 19 of
Act No. 4054, which was in force at the time of the infringement,
ended, Türkiye Halk Bankası A.Ş. and Yapı ve Kredi Bankası A.Ş.
need not be given administrative fines due to the acts of the said
banks. (07.03.2011, 11-13/243-78)
• As a result of the examination conducted into Çimsa Çimento
San. ve Tic. A.Ş. based on the claim that it increased the prices of
cement without any justification and thus placed the ready-mixed
concrete producers in a difficult position, the Board decided that
there is no need to open an investigation under Act No. 4054 and
that the complaint should be dismissed. (10.03.2011, 11-15/261-
89 )
• As a result of the examination conducted based on the claim that
concerning the cars that were purchased to be operated by the
Foundation for Strengthening the Judiciary Organization and that
were given to the service of judiciary, the fees charged to travel for
purposes of seizure proceedings are excessively priced compared