Commentary by the Government of Algeria on Algerian competition legislation

The number of anti-competitive practices has continued to increase.Certain practices, such as the significant imbalance and sudden breakdown of established business relationships, have significantly fuelled the litigation of recent years.The financial risk associated with the judicial admission of a restrictive practice of competition is very significant.Thus, the Paris Court of Appeal (1^st July 2015) did not hesitate to condemn the group. E. LECLERC to return more than 61 million Euros to suppliers, in addition to the payment of the civil fine of a maximum amount of 2 million Euros hitherto provided for by Article L. 442-6 of the Commercial Code.

The law for growth, activity and equal economic opportunities of August 6, 2005 known as the “Macron Law” reinforced the sanction for restrictive practices of competition of Article L. 442-1 of the Commercial Code by allowing the Minister in charge of the economy and the Public Prosecutor’s Office to ask judges to sentence a company to a civil fine of ” 5% of the turnover excluding taxes achieved in France by the author of the practices during the last financial year closed since the year preceding that in which the practices mentioned in this article were implemented “.

A group like CARREFOUR, with a 2014 turnover of nearly 40 billion, is now facing a maximum deterrent penalty of 2 billion Euros.

Articles L. 442-1 et seq. of the Commercial Code exhaustively list restrictive practices of competition.Of these, the most frequently implemented in litigation are the significant imbalance and abrupt termination of established business relationships.