Court Confirmed FAS Decision on Ministry for Regional Development
OREANDA-NEWS. August 04, 2011. The 9th Arbitration Appeal Court in Moscow confirmed legitimacy of the decision and determination issued by the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) regarding the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Regional Development. Earlier Moscow Arbitration Court also found that the decision and determination were made in line with the correct legislation, reported the press-centre of FAS Russia.
On 21st April 2010, FAS found that the Ministry for Regional Development violated Part 1 Article 15 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”.
The case was initiated upon petitions from software developers – “Grand” Centre” Ltd. and “Association of Construction Software Developers” Non-Commercial Organisation.
Investigating the case, the FAS Commission found that the Ministry recommended that organisations should use “Gosstroismeta-Expert” specialised software package, which the Ministry selected as the basic package without organising a tender. FAS Commission classified such recommendations as violations of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”.
The Ministry also did not properly control a subordinate organisation – FTsTsS FGU, which distributed permits (registration cards, certificates, etc.) and kept the Register of software packages used to estimate costs. This organisation disseminated incorrect information about the status of the documents. Failure of the Ministry to undertake necessary actions was also classified by the Commission as a violation of the antimonopoly law.
The Ministry for Regional Development and FTsTsS FGU disagreed with the decision and determination and approached Moscow Arbitration Court.
On 4th April 2011, Moscow Arbitration Court heard the case and confirmed legitimacy of the FAS decision and determination.
The Ministry did not challenge the judgment of the Court of First Instance. FTsTsS FGU considered FAS decision and determination unlawful and the Court judgment wrong, and lodged an appeal.
The Appeal Court upheld the judgment of the Court of First Instance and dismissed the appeal of FTsTsS FGU.
Комментарии