Previous Page  162 / 473 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 162 / 473 Next Page
Page Background

COMPETITION LAW

149

We think that the notification form under Communiqué No. 2010/4

will continue being used since the explanations stated under Communiqué

No. 2013/2 regarding the content of the pre-notification are general and

limited. Otherwise, there would be a long period of information exchange

between the Competition Authority and the notifying persons, which

may cause unnecessary work-loads and loss of time. Therefore, direct

reference to the notification form under Communiqué No. 2010/4 would

be more appropriate.

Final Notification.

In order for acquisitions through privatization

requiring pre-notification to the Competition Authority to become legally

valid, it is mandatory to get authorization from the Competition Board.

Authorization applications to the Competition Board (final

notification) are made by the Presidency of the Privatization

Administration after the conclusion of the tender process, but before the

decision on the final acquisition transaction. This application shall be

prepared in the form of individual files for each bidder to be included in

the High Board of Privatization draft decision to be submitted to the High

Board of Privatization by the Privatization Administration.

Conclusion

The most fundamental change in Communiqué No. 2013/2 is the

abandonment of the market share and turnover threshold system and the

preservation solely of the turnover threshold system in compliance with

Communiqué No. 2010/4. This fundamental change is well directed,

both in terms of harmony with the European Union and uniformity in the

domestic legislation.

We believe that most of the changes made in Communiqué No.

2013/2 are not legally “necessary”. For instance, “

transfers to education

institutions with the nature of public entities”

are not within the scope of

the Communiqué. However, in any case, such transfers do not qualify as

privatization.

In addition to this, since the content of the pre-notification is not

clearly regulated under Communiqué No. 2013/2, it would be more

incisive to refer to the notification form under Communiqué No. 2010/4.