The Administrative Court has rejected an appeal by the Cyprus Telecommunications Authority (CyTA) and upheld a decision by the Commission for the Protection of Competition (CPC) dated 3 August 2018, confirming the legality of the procedure and the correctness of the authority’s legal and substantive findings.
According to a CPC press release, the court validated the decision imposing an administrative fine of €1,166,175 on CyTA for an established violation of Article 6(1)(a) of the Protection of Competition Law (Law 13(I)/2008), as in force at the relevant time.
Background to the case
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Primetel, which concerned alleged violations of Articles 3 and/or 6 of the law. In its August 2018 decision, the CPC found that during the period 2009–2010 CyTA held a dominant position in the retail markets for fixed telephony, retail broadband access and retail subscription television.
Following its examination of the complaint, the CPC assessed all evidence before it, including economic data and analyses submitted by CyTA, and carried out its own economic analysis. The authority unanimously concluded that during 2009–2010 CyTA sold its subscription television service CyTAvision, as well as bundled offerings of DSL Access and CyTAvision, at predatory prices, below cost.
“As a result, the Commission, based on the evidence and data analysed, unanimously decided that there was an intention by CyTA to exclude competition,” the CPC said, finding that CyTA committed violations of Article 6(1)(a) of the law.
The CPC imposed an administrative fine of €583,087.50 for the predatory pricing of the retail subscription television service CyTAvision during 2009–2010, and an additional €583,087.50 for the predatory pricing of the bundled CyTAvision and DSL Access product over the same period.
Court ruling
In its ruling dated 3 April 2026, the Administrative Court dismissed all grounds for annulment raised by CyTA. The court held that the composition of the CPC was lawful, noting that the participation of new or alternate members in later sessions is permitted under Article 9(7)(c) of the law, provided those members have full knowledge of the case file and minutes.
Regarding claims of error, insufficient investigation or lack of reasoning in defining the relevant markets for retail fixed broadband access and retail subscription television, the court found that the CPC applied a properly reasoned methodology. It said the authority drew guidance from relevant EU decisions and case law, conducted a thorough examination of the Cypriot market, and duly considered CyTA’s submissions, which it rejected through a reasoned decision.
On CyTA’s argument that the CPC erred in finding a dominant position and infringements, the court ruled that the authority’s conclusions were based on the evidence before it. It held that dominance resulted from a broader analysis that took into account factors beyond market share alone.
The court further found that the CPC conducted an extensive investigation and substantiated the infringements on the basis of sufficiently probative evidence, thereby discharging its burden of proof. It noted that CyTA failed to submit evidence capable of undermining the probative value of the CPC’s findings, limiting itself instead to verbal challenges of specific conclusions and actions.
Finally, in relation to claims that the fine breached the principles of proportionality and good administration, the court said the CPC had properly focused on the gravity and duration of the infringement and had recorded all factors taken into account before reaching its decision. The court concluded that the CPC’s decision was adequately reasoned.
Source: CNA