Abstract
On 7 April 2020, the plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic ruled on the petitions submitted by two groups of senators seeking the annulment of Act No. 395/2009 Coll., on Significant Market Power in the Sale of Agricultural and Food Products and Abuse Thereof, as amended (the 'SMPA'). Although the Constitutional Court repealed 'only' one provision of the SMPA - the 3% limit for payments from suppliers to buyers with significant market power - and did not agree with the remaining objections, this is a noteworthy judgment.
The Constitutional Court dealt in detail with the possible discriminatory nature of the SMPA. It considered whether, by imposing obligations only on buyers with significant market power and not on suppliers with significant market power, the SMPA discriminated against the former.
The Constitutional Court also addressed the question of whether the SMPA indirectly discriminated against foreign retail chains as they predominantly meet the turnover criterion, which is an essential part of the definition of significant market power. In this context, the Constitutional Court also addressed the objection of a possible restriction of free movement within the internal market of the European Union.
In practice, buyers having significant market power, but also suppliers appreciate the repealing of the 3% limit for supplier payments. This rule was causing difficulties for both parties.
The article contains a translation of the most important passages of the Constitutional Court's ruling and a case note providing commentary and analysis on selected conclusions of the Constitutional Court.