Spasov & Bratanov achieved a landmark victory in a bid rigging case at the Supreme Administrative Court

We are pleased to share that through its final (not subject to further appeal)  Decision 7983 of 14.07.2026 the Supreme Administrative Court has upheld the decision of the Sofia District Administrative Court confirming the full annulment of the fines imposed by the Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition (CPC) on our clients (being part of a single economic unit) for alleged participation in bid rigging and awarded the costs of litigation.

In its judgement the court reaffirms the fundamental principle that parallel market behaviour, by itself, is not evidence of an unlawful concerted practice. Such conduct may justify a finding of collusion only where coordination is the only plausible explanation for the observed market behaviour. Where an objective economic explanation exists, the competition authority must exclude that explanation before concluding that an infringement has occurred.

The Court further emphasised that the burden of proving an infringement rests entirely with the competition authority. Because proceedings imposing competition fines are punitive in their nature, they are subject to the presumption of innocence and require a particularly rigorous evidentiary standard. While infringements may be established through a body of consistent circumstantial evidence, the authority must conduct a comprehensive analysis of all relevant facts, the market context and any relevant alternative explanations before imposing sanctions.

In this case, the Supreme Administrative Court found that the CPC did fail to carry out the requisite economic and market analysis in breach of the law. The authority did not consider the legitimate explanations for the pricing behaviour, did not adequately assess the conduct of other market participants, and did not prove that the observed parallelism could only result from unlawful coordination. Thus the CPC actually failed to prove the alleged infringement of our clients.

The judgment is an important reminder that competition enforcement must be based on robust evidence rather than assumptions. Even where bid-rigging or cartel conduct is alleged, the existence of an agreement or concerted practice cannot be presumed upfront. The legal qualification of conduct as a restriction “by object” does not relieve the authority of its obligation to prove that coordination actually existed and to assess the relevant economic and legal context of each case.

For businesses facing antitrust investigations this judgement underscores the critical importance of a thorough evidentiary analysis, a deep understanding of economic context, and experienced legal representation. Effective defence is built not only on legal arguments, but also on carefully examining every factual allegation, challenging unsupported assumptions, and ensuring that the authority is held to the high standard of proof required by both Bulgarian and EU competition law.

While we are happy for our clients and proud (as the case was closely followed by many of our peers), we regret that other precedential legal issues raised in this complex process (investigation started in 2022 and the CPC has issued two statements of objections before its final decision) remained unanswered by the court as foreclosed by the straightforward  decisions of both the court instances. Such were the  issues of the alleged breach of Art. 101 TFEU in a clearly local situation; the procedural issue of chairing the sessions of the CPC (which invited subsequent change of the law and became thus redundant for the future) and the issue of the procedural standing and of the liability of an ‘economic successor’ as opposed to a ‘legal successor’ (pursuant to a 2021 amendment to the law).

Our team included the Partners Kremena Yaneva – Ivanova and Georgi Spasov, who advised and represented the clients throughout the proceedings at the CPC and at the subsequent court appeals. This case is another confirmation of our team’s capabilities to handle complex antitrust matters successfully.