In July 2022, the Russian FAS refused to initiate proceedings against Denview Limited JSC (Denview) at the request of Tamerlan LLC (Tamerlan) (owner of the retail chains ‘PokupAlko’, ‘Pokupochka’). Denview is a global producer of spirits under the world-famous brands The Macallan and Highland Park, and the company also successfully develops well-known brands in the standard and premium segments in Russia: Jim Beam, The Famous Grouse, Maker's Mark, Sauza, Teacher's and Bols.
Tamerlan believed that Denview had discriminated against Tamerlan and created obstacles to Tamerlan's access to the alcoholic beverages market by failing to enter into a direct supply agreement with him. In addition, Tamerlan accused Denview of entering into an illegal ‘vertical agreement’ as well as abusing its dominant position by unreasonably refusing to enter into a contract.
The FAS of Russia considered that Denview's actions lacked signs of violation of both trade and competition protection legislation. Tamerlan did not agree with the FAS's refusal to initiate proceedings and appealed against it in court. Denview was involved in the case as a third party.
The courts of three instances recognised the refusal of the FAS of Russia to initiate proceedings as lawful, confirming that there was no evidence that Denview imposed requirements on Tamerlan that were different from those normally imposed on other retail chains. Consequently, the courts confirmed the absence of discrimination in Denview's actions.
The courts of three instances recognised the refusal of the FAS of Russia to initiate proceedings as lawful, confirming that there was no evidence that Denview imposed requirements on Tamerlan that were different from those normally imposed on other retail chains. Consequently, the courts confirmed the absence of discrimination in Denview's actions.
Denview's business model of selling products to retail chains through distributors and entering into direct supply agreements only in cases of large volumes of purchases was found to be lawful, due to the need to reduce costs associated with logistics and supply administration. In addition, Denview's actions were not found to be indicative of a minimum retail price recommendation.
Tamerlan made similar demands to other producers of alcoholic beverages: Beluga Market LLC and Alvisa LLC. In both cases, no signs of violation of trade and antimonopoly legislation were found in the actions of the producers. It is noteworthy that in the case of Beluga Market LLC, the courts recognised that it is lawful to recommend a certain price level if it is justified by the positioning of goods on the market.