Case details

Print
Anticompetitive practices
Case reference
PRC/2014/1
Entities involved
  • Portway, Handling de Portugal, s.a.
Natural persons involved
No
Sector
  • Trade and Services
  • Transport & Infrastructure
Activity (NACE)
  • H52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation (include cargo handling)
Investigated practice
  • Abuse of dominant position
Legal provisions
  • National-Law 19/2012-Article 11
Case origin
Complaint
Dawn raids
No
Cooperation with sector regulators
  • ANAC -  Portuguese Civil Aviation Authority
Status
Closed
AdC’s decision
Filing decision
Settlement
Sanction imposed
Summary of the case

On June 25, 2011, OMNI Handling - Aircraft Support Service, Lda. (“OMNI Handling”) submitted a complaint before the Portuguese Competition Authority (AdC) against Portway for an abuse of dominant position through an alleged refusal to provide handling services. (ground handling) at Faro airport.

Until February 10, 2011, there were 2 groundhandling service operators licensed to provide baggage handling, cargo and mail handling services and runway assistance (“reserved services”) at Faro airport: Sociedade Serviços Handling, SA (“SPdH”) operanting under the trademarks Groundforce and Portway. On that date, SPdH ceased its activity in Faro, leaving Portway as sole operator of those services until 2015.

The AdC opened an infringement proceeding in January 1, 2014 and concluded that Portway's alleged refusal to supply appeared to result from contractual disagreements between Portway and OMNI Handling over the period between 2011-2014, which were in the meantime resolved. Those disagreements did not hold anti-competitive motivations.All other suppliers of groundhandling services operating at Faro airport, namely PTS, Jetbase, Safeport, Servisair and LGSP, were asked to comment on the alledged refusal do supply and all failed to detect any cases of refusal to supply following the departure of SPdH from Faro airport. In fact, these same operators provided their free services at Faro airport during the period 2011-2014 as a result of Portway providing reserved services.

As there was no evidence in the case of an abuse of a dominant position by Portway, the AdC concluded the case with a filing decision.

Timeline
Click here to see your activities