The Senate of the Republic of Latvia, in its judgment of 29 September, has dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the 2013 decision of the Competition Council (CC), by which the CC found that the Consulting agency on copyright and communications / Latvian authors’ association (AKKA/LAA) had abused its monopoly position by charging small and medium shops and service providers significantly higher rates for playing music in premises intended for visitors than in Lithuania and Estonia and in most other EU Member States.
AKKA/LAA unites authors of musical works and manages their economic copyrights by issuing licences to perform musical works in public places – shops and customer service halls – for a fee.
The CC investigated the tariffs applied to commercial premises in other European Union (EU) Member States, taking into account the tariffs set by AKKA/LAA in 2011. Particular attention was paid to the tariffs in Lithuania and Estonia, given that the Baltic states are comparable on the basis of objective, appropriate and verifiable criteria. The CC found that tariffs in Latvia are among the highest compared to other EU countries, in particular Lithuania and Estonia, especially for premises ranging from 85.5 m2 to around the 140 m2 mark. In Latvia, the tariffs charged were 50–100% above the EU average. In the decision, the CC concluded that the tariffs set by AKKA/LAA for public performances in shops and service outlets were significantly higher than those set in Estonia and Lithuania and were considered unreasonable.
AKKA/LAA was fined LVL 45,645.83 or EUR 64,948.16 for abusing its dominant position by charging unfair selling prices.
AKKA/LAA appealed against the CC's decision to both the Administrative Regional Court and the Supreme Court. In 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union upheld in principle the method applied by the CC to assess unfair prices in its 2013 decision finding an infringement and fining AKKA/LAA for charging excessive tariffs. This judgment provided clear guidance on future practice in the analysis of excessive prices.
Following the judgment of the CJEU, the case was re-litigated before the Administrative Regional Court and the Supreme Court. On 29 September this year, the Senate, dismissing the cassation appeal, upheld the last judgment of the Administrative Regional Court of 2019, which assessed the arguments in the CC's decision as well-founded, and thus the CC's decision has entered into force.
Andris Eglons, acting head of the Legal Department: “Although ten years have passed since the adoption of the CC's decision, it is important that the CC's decision and the standard of proof used in it have finally been found to be lawful. The proceedings have also crystallised valuable insights from both national and European case law on the objective comparison and use of indicators from different EU Member States in assessing competition law infringements. The process has highlighted the complexity of proving excessive prices, while providing clear tools for both the market and the authority to establish whether prices are excessive. For example, a comparison of tariffs with other EU Member States, in particular neighbouring countries, is considered reasonable. Thus, the findings of the Administrative District Court, the Senate and, of course, the Court of Justice of the European Union, which coincide with and confirm the observations made in the CC's decision, are an important testament to the quality of the authority's work.”