- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
The Turkish Competition Authority (the “TCA”) had scrutinized the poultry sector several times recognizing its vulnerability to collusion and anticompetitive information exchange. In its earlier decisions in 2009 (Poultry-I)1 and 2019 (Poultry-II)2, the TCA concluded that the investigated parties were involved in competitively sensitive information exchange, price coordination and supply restriction. In September 2025, the TCA issued its most far-reaching decisions to date in the poultry sector (Poultry-III)3, not only imposing significant administrative monetary fines on investigated companies but also introducing a sector-wide behavioral measure under Article 9 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (the “Competition Law”).
1. Article 9 and the Legal Basis for Imposing Measures
Article 9 of the Competition Law provides the TCA with the authority to impose measures when it finds infringements of Articles 4, 6, or 7 of the Competition Law. The relevant provision states that the Turkish Competition Board (the “Board”) may order undertakings to adopt or refrain from specific conduct, or in certain cases, divest assets or shares. Remedies must be proportionate to the infringement and necessary to effectively terminate its impact. Importantly, structural remedies are considered only if behavioral measures prove ineffective, and undertakings must be given at least six months to comply with structural remedies once behavioral measures are deemed insufficient.
The TCA's authority to impose such measures was introduced to the Competition Law with the 2020 amendments. This framework reflects a graduated approach: behavioral remedies are the first line of intervention, designed to directly address the conduct that facilitates anti-competitive outcomes. Structural remedies, which are more intrusive, are reserved for persistent or systemic failures of behavioral measures.
2. The Poultry-III Decision: A Landmark Case
In the Poultry-III Decision, the TCA found that 13 undertakings had exchanged competitively sensitive information through future-dated price lists they shared with their resellers. The TCA concluded that this practice allowed firms to anticipate competitors' pricing strategies, reducing uncertainty and facilitating tacit coordination. The TCA imposed administrative monetary fines on the undertakings investigated, totaling TRY 3.7 billion. The most significant aspect of the decision was the imposition of behavioral measures applicable across the entire sector.
The imposed measures require poultry producers to:
- Apply updated price lists immediately upon communication to
buyers, including resellers.
- Terminate the long-standing practice of sharing future-dated
price lists with resellers.
For the first time, the TCA introduced a behavioral rule that applies to the entire poultry sector, not just to the companies directly investigated for anti-competitive practices. This new approach is intended to change long-standing business habits in the industry, particularly practices like sharing future-dated price lists with resellers, which have been common. However, because the TCA has not yet published its reasoned decision, the specific justification and explanation for this measure are not yet known. The imposed measures will take effect once the TCA officially delivers its detailed decision to the relevant parties.
The introduction of sector-wide behavioral measures represents a turning point in Turkish competition enforcement. Traditionally, remedies were directed at specific undertakings found to have violated the law. Extending remedies to the entire sector reflects the TCA's recognition that certain practices cannot be effectively addressed by targeting individual firms alone.
3. Conclusion
The Poultry-III Decision stands out as one of the most significant competition law interventions in recent years. By invoking Article 9 to impose sector-wide behavioral remedies, the TCA has demonstrated its willingness to go beyond administrative fines and obligations on undertakings which infringed Competition Law. The decision illustrates the evolving role of competition law in Türkiye: the TCA is prone to taking active and broader role in reshaping sector-wide practices which may have anticompetitive effects in the future.
Footnotes
1. The Board's Poultry-I Decision dated 25 November 2009 and numbered 09-57/1393-36.
2. The Board's Poultry-II Decision dated 13 March 2019 and numbered 19-12/155-70.
3. The Board's decisions dated 21 May 2024 and numbered 24-23/529-223; 20 December 2024 and numbered 24-54/1225-523; 3 May 2024 and numbered 24-21/488-208; 9 May 2024 and numbered 24-21/500-211; 21 May 2024 and numbered 24-23/529-222; and 18 September 2025 and numbered 25-35/837-492.
© Kolcuoğlu Demirkan Koçaklı Attorneys at Law 2020
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
