The Israeli Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1988, is designed to prevent businesses from placing “obstacles” on the normal course of competition in the market and, inter alia, prohibits the existence of a cartel (or, "restrictive agreement"). Until recently the law included a blanket exemption for reciprocal exclusive distribution agreement. A recent amendment stipulates that as of the end of August, 2015, this exemption will be canceled and exclusive distribution agreements will be subject to the general provisions of the Israeli Antitrust Law. The Israeli legislator granted the market an adjustment period in order to ensure compliance with the new legal requirements and the drafting of new agreements where necessary
Published in Afik News 171 04.02.2015
Related articles
A supplier who terminates an engagement with a distributor because the distributor refused its demand for price coordination breaches an agreement
Competition
Dispute Resolution
A gas products marketer, which sells products to several distributors, demanded that a store owner, with whom it had worked for 15 years, not advertise products at a price lower than the price it set. After the store owner objected to the demand, contending it is a forbidden restrictive arrangement, the distributor stopped supplying its […]
A motion to certify a class action relying solely on a criminal indictment may be summarily dismissed
Competition
Dispute Resolution
A motion to certify a class action was filed against supermarket chains, alleging they were parties to restrictive arrangements intended to harm competition and raise prices. The motion relied solely on an indictment filed by the Israeli Competition Authority. The Court summarily dismissed the motion to certify the class action. Summary dismissal of a claim […]
A monopoly may set different prices for different parties operating in the market but do not compete with each other
Competition
Public Law, Elections Law and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A collector of empty beverage bottles for recycling contended that a collection corporation, which is a monopoly in its field, owed it payment for the difference in bonuses due to it, after discriminating it in comparison to other beverage bottle collectors from among the marketing chains. The Court held that the collection corporation did not […]
A clause in a tender that prohibits coordination of bids prohibits the very disclosure regardless of whether it resulted in damage to the competition
Competition
Public Law, Elections Law and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A number of affiliated companies under the same ownership submitted bids in a tender for the construction of 5 residential and commercial complexes and each won the tender for a complex. As the terms of the tender stated that each bidder in the tender can win a single complex and is forbidden from coordinating offers, […]