- Has your national competition authority published guidelines on competition compliance programmes (“CCPs”)? If so, what are the key components of an effective CCP?
- Are there any recent cases in your jurisdiction where the NCA/competent courts have discussed the impact of CCPs?
- What arguments have been taken into account in relation to a CCP? Has the fact that a company has a CCP been assessed in terms of the effort made or the results achieved, i.e. the efficiency of the programme? Is the focus on future changes in CCPs or on existing programmes?
- Has the role of the management and/or employees of the company been assessed with respect to preventing, participating in, detecting and reporting violations, or remediating violations? Is there a link between the role of the company's management and/or employees and an effective CCP?
- Has the fact that an undertaking has a CCP been helpful in reducing a fine for an infringement of competition law? What facts, arguments or commitments were used to justify the reduction and what is the maximum reduction that can be granted? If a reduction is not granted, why not?
- Are CCPs (their adoption or updating) used as evidence for "self-cleaning" measures when an economic operator risks being excluded from a public procurement procedure for collusive behaviour?
- Please indicate any additional considerations / rules, trends that are important in your country in relation to CCPs.
- Are there legal developments on the horizon in relation to CCPs?
jurisdiction
1. Has your national competition authority published guidelines on competition compliance programmes (“CCPs”)? If so, what are the key components of an effective CCP?
The Slovak Antimonopoly Office (the “Slovak NCA”) has not issued any guidelines on CCPs. From numerous contacts with employees at the Slovak NCA we understand that no such document is currently envisaged.
2. Are there any recent cases in your jurisdiction where the NCA/competent courts have discussed the impact of CCPs?
There is no relevant case law where the Slovak courts (or the Slovak NCA) have discussed the impact of CCPs.
3. What arguments have been taken into account in relation to a CCP? Has the fact that a company has a CCP been assessed in terms of the effort made or the results achieved, i.e. the efficiency of the programme? Is the focus on future changes in CCPs or on existing programmes?
There is no relevant case law
4. Has the role of the management and/or employees of the company been assessed with respect to preventing, participating in, detecting and reporting violations, or remediating violations? Is there a link between the role of the company's management and/or employees and an effective CCP?
There is no relevant case law discussing these matters.
5. Has the fact that an undertaking has a CCP been helpful in reducing a fine for an infringement of competition law? What facts, arguments or commitments were used to justify the reduction and what is the maximum reduction that can be granted? If a reduction is not granted, why not?
There is no relevant case law discussing these matters.
6. Are CCPs (their adoption or updating) used as evidence for "self-cleaning" measures when an economic operator risks being excluded from a public procurement procedure for collusive behaviour?
There is no relevant case law.
7. Please indicate any additional considerations / rules, trends that are important in your country in relation to CCPs.
We are not aware of any considerations, rules, or trends that are important regarding CCPs in Slovakia.
8. Are there legal developments on the horizon in relation to CCPs?
Following consultations with the Slovak NCA, no CCP-related developments are currently being considered.
