Notícias
AdC condena cartel em concursos públicos em hospitais
Comunicado 02/2024
15 de janeiro de 2024
A AdC condenou cinco empresas a uma coima total de €6.888.300 por terem participado num cartel em concursos públicos para prestação de serviços de telerradiologia a hospitais e centros hospitalares no território nacional, no âmbito do processo designado PRC/2021/3.
A investigação
Perante indícios de uma prática restritiva da concorrência nos mencionados concursos públicos, a AdC determinou a abertura de uma investigação, tendo em setembro e outubro de 2021, efetuado operações de busca e apreensão, com vista a obter prova dos comportamentos em causa.
Da investigação da AdC resultou que as cinco empresas definiam conjuntamente quais as empresas que, em procedimentos de contratação pública para a prestação de serviços de telerradiologia, iriam apresentar as propostas vencedoras, iludindo os resultados dos concursos.
As empresas envolvidas no cartel combinavam entre si os preços que futuramente apresentariam a concurso, de modo a garantir que a melhor proposta seria a da empresa por elas definida. Acordavam ainda que as demais seriam excluídas do concurso como consequência da apresentação de propostas que incumpriam critérios de carácter eliminatório.
Os contactos estabelecidos permitiram às empresas envolvidas repartir entre si o mercado nacional da prestação de serviços de telerradiologia e implementarem estratégias tendentes a um aumento generalizado dos preços, lesando os hospitais e centros hospitalares contratantes.
Os serviços de telerradiologia
A telerradiologia permite a realização de exames de diagnóstico num estabelecimento de saúde, sem a presença física de um médico radiologista ou neurorradiologista. Os médicos especialistas recebem posterior e remotamente as imagens e resultados dos exames de diagnóstico realizados nos estabelecimentos de saúde, procedem à sua interpretação e elaboram o respetivo relatório, que depois transmitem ao estabelecimento de saúde em causa.
Estes serviços são prestados por empresas a entidades do SNS, através de procedimentos de contratação pública. O recurso à telerradiologia é especialmente relevante nos casos em que os estabelecimentos de saúde não possuem equipas que integrem médicos especialistas em radiologia e/ou neurorradiologia para dar resposta às necessidades locais, permitindo suprir tais carências e auxiliar na interpretação de diagnósticos complexos.
O processo
Duas das empresas envolvidas decidiram colaborar com a AdC e acederam ao procedimento de transação, antes da decisão final. Ao fazê-lo, as empresas reconhecem a participação no cartel, pagam voluntariamente a coima e abdicam da litigância judicial, concluindo o processo e beneficiando de uma redução da coima.
Quanto às restantes três empresas, a AdC emitiu a Nota de Ilicitude (ou nota de acusação) em novembro de 2022, tendo dado a oportunidade a todas as empresas de exercerem os seus direitos de audição e defesa, o que foi devidamente considerado na decisão final.
As coimas
O valor total das coimas aplicadas nesta decisão final ascende a €6.889.300,00, correspondendo €5.038.200,00 e €202.300,00, respetivamente, às sanções aplicadas às duas empresas que aderiram ao procedimento de transação.
As coimas impostas pela AdC são determinadas pelo volume de negócios das empresas sancionadas nos mercados afetados nos anos da prática. Além disso, de acordo com a Lei da Concorrência, as coimas não podem exceder 10% do volume de negócios da empresa no ano anterior à decisão de sanção.
Ao fixar as coimas, a AdC tem em conta a gravidade e a duração da infração, o grau de participação das empresas na infração, a situação económica das empresas, entre outras circunstâncias, de acordo com as melhores práticas internacionais (ver Linhas de Orientação da AdC sobre metodologia a aplicar na aplicação de coimas).
Inibição de participação em procedimentos de contratação pública
Em face da gravidade das infrações e tendo em conta as exigências de prevenção deste tipo de práticas, a AdC aplicou, ainda, uma sanção acessória às três empresas agora condenadas.
A sanção inibe as empresas de participar, por um período de 1 ano, em procedimentos de formação de contratos de natureza pública, cujo objeto abranja a prestação de serviços de telerradiologia, na totalidade ou em parte do território nacional.
As decisões sancionatórias da AdC podem ser objeto de recurso para o Tribunal da Concorrência, Regulação e Supervisão. O recurso não suspende a execução das coimas.
Prioridade ao combate a cartéis
O combate a cartéis, em particular no âmbito da contratação pública, tem prioridade máxima para a AdC, atendendo aos prejuízos que invariavelmente causam às famílias, aos consumidores e, neste caso, ao Estado forçando-o a pagar preços mais elevados e reduzindo a qualidade e diversidade dos bens e serviços à sua disposição.
A violação das regras de concorrência não só reduz o bem-estar dos consumidores, como prejudica a competitividade das empresas, penalizando a economia.
Fonte: Adc Portugal
EST Distribuição notifica a aquisição do controlo exclusivo sobre a Inquieta Conquista.
Ficha do processo
Fonte: Adc Portugal
CMA review of Part 3, Article 29, and Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the Home Credit Market Investigation Order 2007 Consultation
From:Competition and Markets AuthorityPublished16 January 2024Get emails about this page
Summary
The CMA is consulting on whether to carry out a formal review of Part 3, Article 29, and Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the Home Credit Market Investigation Order 2007.
This consultation closes at
Consultation description
We are publishing an Invitation to Comment concerning a potential review of Part 3, article 29 and Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the Home Credit Market Investigation Order 2007. The CMA has identified a possible change in circumstances indicating that a review of those parts of that remedy may be appropriate.
The CMA is not proposing to review the remainder of the Order, which remains outside the scope of this consultation.
The CMA invites comments from stakeholders on the possible change of circumstance identified in the Invitation to Comment document, and on whether carrying out a review should be considered to be an administrative priority for the CMA.
The information received will assist the CMA in reaching a decision on whether or not to launch a review of those parts of the Order.
Respondents should provide their views supported with relevant evidence where possible, in writing to the CMA at the address below.
The CMA requests that all submissions be accompanied by a non-confidential version which the respondent would be willing to have published on the CMA website in the event that a formal review is launched.
The CMA has today published a Notice of Suspension of Part 3, Article 29, and Part 1 of Schedule 4 of the Home Credit Market Investigation Order 2007 pending the outcome of this Invitation to Comment and any subsequent review.
When responding by email, please use the subject line Home Credit.
Documents
Notice of Suspension
PDF, 124 KB, 1 page
Invitation to Comment
PDF, 150 KB, 5 pages
Ways to respond
Email to:
Write to:
Invitation to Comment: Home Credit
Remedies, Business and Financial Analysis
Area B8.02
Competition and Markets Authority
25 Cabot Square
London
E14 4QZ
Referral of the proposed subsidy by the Department for Business and Trade for Post Office Process Review compensation
The Subsidy Advice Unit (SAU) has accepted a request from the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) for a report concerning its proposed restructuring subsidy for the Post Office Process Review compensation.From:Competition and Markets AuthorityPublished15 January 2024Case type:SAU referralCase state:OpenMarket sector:Distribution and service industriesOpened:12 January 2024
Contents
- Administrative timetable
- Request from Department for Business and Trade
- Information about the subsidy provided by DBT
- Information for third parties
- Notes to third parties wishing to make a submission
- Contacts
This subsidy is to support redress to impacted postmasters and is separate to the work of Post Office Limited in compensating postmasters for the Suspension Remuneration Review, Horizon-related shortfalls and for overturned convictions.
Administrative timetable
| Date | Action |
|---|---|
| 22 Feburary 2024 | SAU’s report to be published |
| 26 January 2024 | Deadline for receipt of any third party submissions (submissions after 5pm on this date cannot be taken into account) |
| 12 January 2024 | Beginning of reporting period |
Request from Department for Business and Trade
12 January 2024: The SAU has accepted a request from DBT for a report concerning its proposed restructuring subsidy for the Post Office Process Review compensation, concerning operational issues unrelated to compensating postmasters for the Suspension Remuneration Review, Horizon-related shortfalls and for overturned convictions.
This request relates to a Subsidy of Particular Interest.
The SAU will prepare a report, which will provide an evaluation of DBT’s assessment of whether the subsidy complies with the subsidy control requirements (Assessment of Compliance). The SAU will complete its report within 30 working days.
Information about the subsidy provided by DBT
Post Office Limited is a Public Non-Financial Corporation (Public Corporation) constituted under the Postal Services Acts 2000 and 2011, and is wholly owned by the Secretary of State for Business and Trade. The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) explained that through Post Office Limited, the government ensures the provision of a network of post office branches, delivering essential services to customers across the UK. It was also explained that the government provides Post Office Limited with subsidy and investment funding and has, since 2021, also provided funding to enable Post Office Limited to manage financial liabilities arising from issues relating to previous versions of the Horizon IT system.
DBT explained that, arising from findings of the Hon Mr Justice Fraser in the ‘Common Issues Judgment’, Post Office Limited has found previous operational issues unrelated to Horizon shortfalls such as processes and/or policies regarding certain services that impacted postmasters financially. DBT is now proposing to award Post Office Limited a grant of up to £81million to enable it to provide redress to postmasters who may have been impacted by the operational issues identified. This is separate to the work of Post Office Limited in compensating postmasters for the Suspension Remuneration Review, Horizon-related shortfalls and for overturned convictions.
DBT explained that the government ‘considers that it is important that Post Office Limited continues to implement improvements following the Common Issues Judgment, including through the delivery of compensation to affected postmasters. Government is therefore proposing to provide this additional subsidy to Post Office Limited to ensure it can carry out appropriate redress. By extension, it is intended that this investment will also support the provision of a stable post office network, providing essential services to customers across the UK’.
DBT further explained that, as the sole shareholder of Post Office Limited, it ‘will continue to provide oversight to ensure that compensation is delivered quickly and effectively to affected postmasters and that operational costs are well managed. The subsidy will be ringfenced for the purposes outlined above and may not be used for supporting other activities undertaken by Post Office Limited’.
DBT has stated that the grant funding will cover the period to the end of the 2025 to 2026 Financial Year and that grant payments will be released to Post Office Limited in arrears on evidence of expenditure and regular reporting. It was also explained that Post Office Limited will communicate with current and former postmasters to outline the scope of the remediation process in the coming months.
Information for third parties
If you wish to comment on matters relevant to the SAU’s evaluation of the Assessment of Compliance concerning proposed subsidy for Post Office Process Review compensation, please send your comments before 5pm on the date stipulated in the timetable above. For guidance on representations relevant to the Assessment of Compliance, see the section on reporting period and transparency in the Operation of the subsidy control functions of the Subsidy Advice Unit.
Please send your submissions to us at SAU-PostOfficeCompensationSubsidy2024@cma.gov.uk, copying the public authority: glocompensation@beis.gov.uk.
Please also provide a contact address and explain in what capacity you are making the submission (for example, as an individual or a representative of a business or organisation).
Notes to third parties wishing to make a submission
The SAU will only take your submission into account if it can be shared with DBT. The SAU will send a copy of your submission to DBT together with its report. This is to allow the public authority to take account of the submission in its decision as to whether to grant or modify the subsidy or its assessment. We therefore ask that you provide express consent for your full and unredacted submission to be shared. We also encourage you to share your submission directly with DBT using the email address provided above.
The SAU may use the information you provide in its published report. Therefore, you should indicate in your submission whether any specified parts of it are commercially confidential. If the SAU wishes to refer in its published report to material identified as confidential, it will contact you in advance.
For further details on confidentiality of third party submissions, see identifying confidential information in the Operation of the subsidy control functions of the Subsidy Advice Unit.
Contacts
- SAU project team: SAU-PostOfficeCompensationSubsidy2024@cma.gov.uk
- CMA press team: 020 3738 6460 or press@cma.gov.uk
Published 15 January 2024
Casos
CADE
Ato de Concentração n° 08700.009140/2023-62
Requerentes: LATAM Airlines Group S.A. e Delta Air Lines, INC.
Advogados: Paola Pugliese, Milena Mundim, Julia Braga, José Inácio F. de Almeida Prado Filho e Maria Eduarda de Jesus Genova.
Com fulcro no §1º do art. 50 da Lei nº 9.784, de 1999, integro as razões do Parecer nº 1/2024/CGAA4/SGA1/SG (SEI 1333436) à presente decisão, inclusive quanto à sua motivação. Nos termos do art. 13, XII, e art. 57, I, da Lei nº 12.529, de 2011, decido pela aprovação sem restrições do presente Ato de Concentração.
Comissão Europeia
FORD / BMW / HONDA / JV
Merger
Last decision date:15.01.2024 Super simplified procedure
WT / FEI
Merger
Last decision date: 15.01.2024 Super simplified procedure