Major Assignments - Competition Law

A significant judgment of the Supreme Court on abnormally low tenders in public procurement

Attorney-at-law Sandor Elias represented a client in a significant dispute in the Supreme Court in administrative matter 3-20-924. In its judgment of 4 November 2020, the Supreme Court found that contrary to the understanding that has taken hold in the current judicial practice, not every tender below its cost price is prohibited. The Supreme Court found that cross-subsidisation with non-contractual revenue is not prohibited, unless separately forbidden by the law applicable in the field or the terms and conditions of the public procurement. However, a tender below its cost price is unacceptable, for example, if it distorts competition, foremost if the tenderer were to thereby abuse its dominant position by freezing out its competitors from the market. In conclusion, the decision of the Supreme Court is significant in shaping the future of the public procurement landscape. First, it brings the logic of public procurements and of private market closer together as a tender below its cost price is also not always prohibited in the usual relationship between entrepreneurs. Secondly, it inevitably places a somewhat higher administrative burden on contracting authorities.

Insurance law advice to a leading Estonian film producer

TRINITI advised the largest Estonian new generation film production company Nafta Films in an insurance matter during the making of their spy thriller O2. The leading male actor Priit Võigemast injured his ankle during the shooting of the film in Finland which brought along changes to the shooting timetable and extra costs. TRINITI attorneys-at-law Tõnis Tamme ja Klen Laus advised the client and later also had an opportunity to participate as extras in some of the scenes of the movie.

Representing BIC

TRINITI successfully represented Société BIC, a known international producer of disposable products, in several cases regarding the infringement of the trademark owner’s rights. In the cases, the Lithuanian courts assessed whether the trademarks used by the defendants were confusingly similar to the registered three-dimensional trademark of the Bic pen, more specifically the Bic Cristal. The courts satisfied the claims and decided that the defendant shall cover the losses of SOCIETE BIC to compensate for the infringement of the trademark owner’s rights and unfair competition, and also ruled to remove the infringing goods from the market

Dispute with the Lithuanian Competition Council

TRINITI represented the client Pirmoji kava, a leading events organizing company, in a dispute against the Lithuanian Competition Council. The dispute arose when members of the Association of Events Organizers agreed to charge every purchasing organization a starting-fee so that their ideas and concepts disclosed over the public procurement could be protected. The Lithuanian Competition Council fined the claimant for participating in a cartel organized by and through the Association of Events Organizers