Please register to access this content.
To continue viewing the content you love, please sign in or create a new account
Dismiss
This content is for our paying subscribers only

Gulf Saudi

Saudi Arabia: 6 contracting companies fined SR77 million for involvement in monopolistic practices

Kingdom warns businesses against collusion to raise prices



The companies were charged with breaching kingdom's competition law. Illustrative image.
Image Credit: Shutterstock/Vijith Pulikkal

Cairo: A Saudi government anti-trust agency has announced imposing more than SR77 million on six contracting companies for involvement in monopolistic practices.

The General Authority for Competition (GAC) said the six businesses had been implicated over committing violations of collusion and coordination among themselves in government adjudications.

Get exclusive content with Gulf News WhatsApp channel

They were charged with breaching the competition law in the kingdom.

An affiliated committee tasked with ruling on violations of the competition law penalised the involved companies by total fines of SR77.5 million.

Advertisement

Also read

GAC said it will publish the committee’s full decision after it becomes final.

Earlier this month, the agency had warned commercial establishments of the violation of raising prices by colluding among them, a prohibited practice.

This act has “negative impacts” on consumers and markets, and results in “unjustified” price rises, it explained.

In June, GAC announced slapping SR14.8 million on six companies operating in transporting cars and other goods after they were found implicated in agreeing among themselves to increase prices.

Advertisement

In April, the Authority penalised 14 cement companies by imposing a fine of SR10 million on each for colluding to raise cement prices and monopolise the market in violation of the Saudi competition law that bans acts, agreements among competing companies resulting in controlling prices of goods and services.

A court based in Riyadh rejected appeals filed by these companies against the decision, making it final.

The companies were, moreover, ordered to publish the penalty decision at their expense.

Advertisement