Poland updates leniency rules: UOKiK issues new guidelines

UOKiK has issued its new leniency guidelines

These are UOKiK’s second leniency guidelines on the topic; the first were issued in 2017. The new guidelines take into account recent amendments to the Competition and Consumer Protection Act (resulting from the ECN+ Directive) and the new Regulation of the Council of Ministers on the leniency program. Most importantly, they are based on UOKiK’s extensive experience in applying the leniency program.

One of the key new chapters addresses the practical challenges faced by entrepreneurs operating within complex corporate groups. An entrepreneur who is part of a large capital group may be unsure which entity within that group should submit the application. Further, the new guidelines provide clarification on how to express the intention to submit a leniency application.

The leniency program allows companies and managers involved in anti-competitive agreements to reduce the fine or avoid it altogether. This possibility is open to those engaged in anti-competitive horizontal or vertical practices. The requirement is to provide evidence or information concerning prohibited activities and to cooperate with UOKiK.

If a company is already under investigation, it may still submit a leniency notice and benefit from the so-called leniency plus program, which is a Polish particularity compared to other EU leniency regimes. A leniency applicant who has filed an application for reducing a fine may submit an additional application for waiver of a fine relating to another agreement and receive an additional reduction (beyond the statutory reductions available to leniency applicants).

Overall, in the last five years alone, UOKiK has received over 30 leniency applications in 12 matters investigated. 

Examples of UOKiK’s enforcement include:

• Yamaha (resale price maintenance, 2020). UOKiK fined Yamaha Music Europe approx. PLN 0.5 million for a 13-year RPM practice with its distributors. The amount reflected Yamaha’s leniency reduction and its voluntary acceptance of the fine.
• DAF Truck Dealers (market-sharing & price-fixing, 2021). UOKiK issued two decisions against DAF truck distributors. In the first case (five dealers), two companies - TB Truck & Trailer Serwis and its Dutch parent Van Tilburg-Bastianen - applied under the leniency program. They received 50% fine reductions (plus an extra 10% for voluntarily accepting the fine). They were ineligible for full immunity because UOKiK already had sufficient evidence to initiate proceedings when they applied. In the second DAF case, no leniency was involved.
• Kärcher (resale price maintenance, 2023). UOKiK fined Kärcher’s Polish unit PLN 26 million for a decades-long RPM practice with its distributors. Kärcher applied for leniency and supplied additional evidence, so its fine was reduced. It did not receive full immunity, as it was the instigator of the practice and UOKiK already had sufficient evidence to proceed.
• Iveco Truck Dealers (market-sharing & price-fixing, 2024). UOKiK uncovered an anticompetitive agreement between Iveco’s Polish importer and 10 regional dealers who agreed not to compete outside assigned territories and to align prices. Multiple leniency applications were received in this case. DBK Group was the first to apply for leniency (after proceedings began) and obtained a 50% fine reduction for itself and its subsidiaries. Trans-Poz applied second, securing a 20% reduction. The leniency applications also led to equivalent reductions for four managers.

The new leniency guidelines can be accessed online, in Polish only.

The leniency program is not the only way for UOKiK to obtain information about collusive practices that restrict competition. UOKiK also operates a platform for receiving information from whistleblowers. The system guarantees full anonymity, even from UOKiK itself.

If you need more information or further guidance in this area, please contact Marcin Alberski and Stanislaw Szymanek.

VISIT OUR COMPETITION LAW HOMEPAGE