Pursuant to the provisions of the Law on Competition no 183 as of  11.07.2012, the Competition Councilesures the observance of the competition legistation by actions of preventing anticompetitive practices, removing competition infringements, promoting and improving competition culture.

     Pursuant to the same law, theCompetition Council notifies the competent authorities about the incompatibility of the enactments with the legislation in the domain of competition, state aid and advertising within its competences.

     In this vein, for the purpose of fulfilling the provisions of the legislation, on the grounds of notifications made by consumers as to the order of disconnection of electricity to consumers, regulated by current enactments, the National Agency for Protection of Competition (Competition Council succesor of powers) carried on in 2008 an investigation of the competiton environment on the market of electricity distribution.

     Therefore, by virtue of its legal duties, it issued the Decision of the National Agency for Protection of Competition   no CNP 75-08/13 as of 22.02.2011, and the Prescription CNP 75-08/13-14 as of 22.02.2011, qualifying as abuse of dominant position the actions of CSE RED Union Fenosa S.A. related to the inclusion in the electricity bill payment of the notification about the disconnection and required the applicant to cease these actions, as well notified the National Agency for Energetic Regulation as to ensuring the observance of the current legislation provisions.

     The decision related to the above mentioned facts was annulled by Decision of the Court of Appeal as of 14 November 2011.

     It is worth mentioning that within the examination of the clause at the Court of Appeal, the National Agency for Energetic Regulation supported the action  brought by CSE RED Union Fenosa S.A. and requested for the annulment of the Decision of NAPC and Prescription of CNP.

     The decision of the Court of Appeal was held by decision of Supreme Court of Justice as of 15 February 2012.

     Without commenting, we would like to note that the tasks of the Competition Councildo   not overlap with the powers of the court or the National Agency for Energetic Regulation, and the National Agency for Energetic Regulation does not have jurisdiction to pronounce on the appropriateness of administrative acts issued by the Competition Council.

     In this vein, we have to mention that while examining the case in the court, account was taken exclusively of the interests of the provider, the rights and the needs of consumers being ignored.

    The case of the citizen Dumitru Marian elucidated in the article “DANGEROUS monopolies // Union Fenosa as SOURCE OF OXIGEN? (www.politik.md as of 17 March, this year), demonstrates actuality and importance of the issue raised.

     In this respect, the Competition Councilfurther maintains its position indicated in the Decision ofNational Agency for Protection of Competition   no CNP 75-08/13 as of 22.02.2011, qualifying the actions of stipulating in the electricity payment bill the information about the eventual disconnection from the electricity network, without further warning and within 10 calendaristic days as being abuse of dominant position, fact which harms the legitimate interests of the consumer.