NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

175 COMPETITION LAW the annual gross revenues of the undertakings, generated at the end of the fiscal year preceding the final decision, or if that cannot be calculated, at the end of the fiscal year closest to the date of the final decision, shall be taken as the basis point. The Board applied an aggravating ratio for the infringement du- ration and reducing ratio considering that Güven Beton and Sorgun Emek Beton provide services to an important project concerning the fast train services from Ankara to Sivas, and the subject matter activi- ties are important for the Yozgat region’s economy which has a low income. Conclusion The Decision is remarkable, since the Board made a “cartel” de- termination, instead of any other infringement type. The Turkish case law, including an explicit cartel determination, is rare since the Board is generally reluctant to hold decisions identifying a cartel infringe- ment. Instead of that it refers to infringements such as information ex- change or concerted practice. Therefore, it is very important to assess Board decisions identifying a cartel infringement and compare these with the decisions identifying other types of Article 4 infringements. Accordingly, the decision lights the way in terms of the conditions that the Board looks for identifying a cartel infringement. From the decision it is understood that the Board made detailed analysis of the documents and determined that these are agreements which comprise the information sharing regarding price, sales amount and types, customer data, maturity options, income data on undertaking basis. Therefore, the condition of “agreement” of a cartel behavior has been put forward. The Decision also indicates that the Board assessed the monitoring mechanism as a condition to cartel, in line with its past decisions of Cherry Cartel 1 and Sivas Driver Course 2 . The Board also marks the difference between the horizontal cooperation agreements and cartels by stating that the documents at hand indicate that the un- dertakings made decisions on strategic subjects and these validate the 1 Decision dated 24.07.2007 and numbered 07-60/713-245. 2 Decision dated 09.12.2010 and numbered 10-25/350-124.