Home About Us Services Awards Team Insights Career Contact Us TÜRKÇEENGLISH Devin Patent — Istanbul
Competition/Insights

Developments in Turkish Competition Law — October 2026: The Catering Tender Investigation and the Media Markt Decision

Rekabet Hukukunda Ekim 2026 Gelişmeleri: Toplu Yemek İhalelerinde Soruşturma ve Media Markt Kararı
Published19 October 2026
Reading time14 min
PDF
← All Insights
CategoryCompetition
Published19 October 2026
Contents01Introduction02Investigation into Catering Service Tenders03Hub-and-Spoke Cartel Decision concerning Media Markt04Decision on Public Procurement of Chlor-Alkali Products05Decision on Territory and Customer Sharing in the Grey Cement Market06Two Files Concluded through the Settlement Procedure07Decisions Taken Following Court Judgments08Reasoning of the Interim Measure Decision in the Instant Noodle Market09DSM Grup's Request for the Lifting of Its Commitments10Conclusion
Devin Law & IP

This subject falls outside trademark and patent attorneyship. Legal services in this field are provided by our law firm, Devin Law & IP.

Go to devinlaw.com.tr →
SummaryÖzet

This legal update presents the announcements and reasoned decisions published by the Turkish Competition Authority (“the Authority”) on its website between 13 October 2026 and 19 October 2026. The update covers the announcement dated 19 October 2026 concerning the opening of an investigation against ten undertakings active in catering service procurement tenders, and nine decisions selected from the reasoned decisions published in the “Competition Board Decisions” section of the Authority’s website on 13, 15 and 16 October 2026. The dates of the reasoned decisions range from 18 December 2025 to 23 September 2026, and this update states the decision date and the publication date separately.

Key takeaway · Kilit sonuç

The Board unanimously held that Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti. infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 as a party to a hub-and-spoke cartel and imposed an administrative fine of TRY 330,322,816.48.

01
Introduction

At its meeting of 8 October 2026, the Competition Board (“the Board”) decided to open an investigation against ten undertakings on the allegation of collusion in tenders for the procurement of catering services by public institutions and bodies; the decision was announced on the Authority’s website on 19 October 2026. The opening of an investigation does not constitute a finding of infringement.

The reasoned decisions published in the same week include decision No. 26-11/343-130, by which an administrative fine of TRY 330,322,816.48 was imposed on Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti. for a hub-and-spoke cartel; decision No. 25-49/1206-681, by which administrative fines were imposed on seven undertakings for collusion in public procurement in the chlor-alkali products sector; decision No. 26-09/278-99 concerning territory and customer sharing in the grey cement market; two settlement decisions concerning resale price maintenance and negative matching in Google advertisements; two decisions concerning EssilorLuxottica S.A. and Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ taken following court judgments; the reasoning of the interim measure decision concerning Adkoturk Gıda San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.; and the decision rejecting the request of DSM Grup Danışmanlık İletişim ve Satış Ticaret AŞ for the lifting of its commitments.

02
Investigation into Catering Service Tenders

According to the announcement of the Authority dated 19 October 2026, the preliminary investigation conducted into the allegation that undertakings active in the catering services sector had infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Competition Law”) was concluded by the Board. The announcement states that the Board, having deliberated at its meeting of 8 October 2026 on the information, documents and findings obtained in the preliminary investigation, “found the findings serious and sufficient” and decided to open investigation No. 26-37/1006-M against Akyol Kurumsal Yemek Hizmetleri Ltd. Şti., Aş Dünyası Yemek Hizmetleri Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti., Azık Yemek Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ, Bircan Temizlik ve Yemek Hizmetleri Turizm İnşaat Nakliyat Hayvancılık Gıda Sanayi Ticaret Ltd. Şti., Emiroğulları Yemek Fabrikaları Gıda İnşaat Temizlik Hizmetleri San. Tic. Ltd. Şti., Gusto Toplu Yemek Üretim Hizmetleri ve Gıda San. Tic. Ltd. Şti., Kaf Yemek San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti., Kalfoğlu Yemek Ticaret Ltd. Şti., Paraf Yemek Temizlik ve Özel Eğitim Hizmetleri İnşaat Nakliyat Ticaret Ltd. Şti. and Şimal Yemek Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti.

The Board's Assessment

According to the announcement, “Within the scope of the investigation, the allegation that the undertakings caused public loss by colluding in tenders for the procurement of catering services organised by public institutions and bodies will be examined.” The announcement contains no finding of infringement; the investigation is ongoing.

03
Hub-and-Spoke Cartel Decision concerning Media Markt

The Board’s reasoned decision No. 26-11/343-130 dated 2 April 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. According to the decision, the investigation was opened by the Board’s decision No. 25-07/177-M(2) dated 20 February 2025 on the allegations that Fakir Elektrikli Ev Aletleri Dış Ticaret AŞ interfered with the sale prices of its resellers and restricted internet sales, and that indirect information exchange took place through Fakir between Vatan Bilgisayar San. ve Tic. AŞ, Teknosa İç ve Dış Tic. AŞ and Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti. The decision states that the investigation proceedings concerning Fakir, Teknosa and Vatan were concluded through the settlement procedure by the Board’s decisions Nos. 25-21/508-337, 25-21/509-338 and 25-21/517-341 dated 28 May 2025.

The Board's Assessment

The Board unanimously held that “Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti. infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition by being a party to an agreement and/or concerted practice exhibiting the characteristics of a hub-and-spoke cartel” and decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 330,322,816.48 on the basis of its 2024 gross revenue. The decision states that the infringement was treated within the category of “clear and serious infringements”, that the base fine rate was increased by one fifth because a period of one year, three months and seven days lay between the earliest and the latest dated documents forming the basis of the infringement allegation, and that a reduction of 70% was applied in view of the very low share of the activities subject to the infringement in annual gross revenues. The decision was taken subject to judicial review before the Ankara Administrative Courts within 60 days of the notification of the reasoned decision.

04
Decision on Public Procurement of Chlor-Alkali Products

The Board’s reasoned decision No. 25-49/1206-681 dated 25 December 2025 was published on 16 October 2026. The file is based on the preliminary investigation initiated ex officio by the Board’s decision No. 24-16/373-M dated 4 April 2024 and the investigation opened by its decision No. 24-26/626-M(2) dated 12 June 2024. The subject matter of the file is the determination of whether Koruma Klor Alkali Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ and certain undertakings infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 by colluding in the process of determining price bids and the estimated cost in certain public procurements.

The Board's Assessment

The Board unanimously held that the economic unit consisting of Koruma Klor Alkali Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ, 2S Kimya Arıtma Tarım İnşaat Gıda Turizm Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ and Aykimsan Hiçyılmaz Kimyasal Ürünler İnşaat Gıda Turizm Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti., together with Irmak Kimya Sanayi ve Turizm Nakliyat Tarım Ürünleri ve Geri Dönüşüm Ticaret Ltd. Şti., Süleyman Kimya Arıtım İnşaat Nakliye ve Tehlikeli Madde Danışmanlığı Hizmetleri Sanayi Ticaret Ltd. Şti., Nalan Uslu-Anadolu Kimya and Kuzey Test Analiz Kimya Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti., “infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition by colluding in the process of determining price bids and the estimated cost in certain public procurements”. By the decision, administrative fines were imposed on the basis of 2024 gross revenues as follows: TRY 328,968,166.55 on Koruma Klor Alkali Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ, TRY 1,887,206.81 on the economic unit consisting of 2S Kimya and Aykimsan, TRY 728,100.78 on Irmak Kimya, TRY 907,317.86 on Süleyman Kimya, TRY 51,214.72 on Nalan Uslu-Anadolu Kimya and TRY 775,208.68 on Kuzey Test Analiz Kimya. The decision states that small-scale status was accepted as a mitigating factor in the light of the particular circumstances of the case.

05
Decision on Territory and Customer Sharing in the Grey Cement Market

The Board’s reasoned decision No. 26-09/278-99 dated 12 March 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. The investigation was opened against Arkoz Madencilik Enerji Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ, Limak Çimento Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ and Yurt Çimento Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ by the Board’s decision No. 24-49/1082-M dated 21 November 2024, following a letter sent to the Authority by the General Directorate of Domestic Trade of the Ministry of Trade of the Republic of Türkiye and a complaint filed with a request for confidentiality.

The Board's Assessment

The Board held, by majority, that the three undertakings “infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition through the practice that took the form of territory and/or customer sharing in the market for the production and sale of grey cement”, and decided to impose administrative fines on the basis of 2024 gross revenues of TRY 25,390,876.53 on Arkoz Madencilik, TRY 117,556,918.46 on Limak Çimento and TRY 46,797,203.86 on Yurt Çimento. The Board further held, by majority, that Yurt Çimento Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 “by imposing territorial and customer restrictions on its resellers in the market for the production and sale of cement” and decided to impose an administrative fine of TRY 16,846,993.39 on that ground. The dissenting opinions annexed to the decision state that the majority view was not shared, on the ground that the findings in the file were not sufficient to prove the infringement.

06
Two Files Concluded through the Settlement Procedure
Resale Price Maintenance: Carex, Farma Plus and Digital Farma

The Board’s decision No. 26-15/429-160 dated 22 April 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. The investigation was opened by the Board’s decision No. 25-48/1164-M dated 18 December 2025 in order to determine whether the economic unit consisting of Carex Bitkisel Ürünler ve Kozmetik Sanayi Ticaret AŞ, Farma Plus İlaç Bant Sağlık ve Kozmetik Ürünleri Sanayi Ticaret Ltd. Şti. and Digital Farma İlaç Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti. infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 by fixing the resale prices of its purchasers and restricting internet sales. The settlement submission sent by the undertaking pursuant to the Board’s interim settlement decision No. 26-11/348-MUA dated 2 April 2026 was entered in the Authority’s records on 15 April 2026.

The Board's Assessment

The Board held that the economic unit “infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 through resale price maintenance”, and decided that an administrative fine of TRY 6,648,358.91 be imposed on the basis of its 2024 gross revenue, that a reduction of 25% be applied to the fine as a result of the settlement procedure, and that a final administrative fine of TRY 4,986,269.18 be imposed. The decision states that the investigation was concluded by settlement “in respect of the resale price maintenance allegations”.

Negative Matching in Google Advertisements: Gürgençler Bilişim

The Board’s decision No. 26-16/456-166 dated 30 April 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. The subject matter of the file is the conclusion, in respect of Gürgençler, of the investigation opened against Artı Bilgisayar Satış ve Eğitim Hizmetleri İnşaat Makine Sanayi AŞ and Gürgençler Bilişim İletişim İç ve Dış Ticaret AŞ by the Board’s decision No. 25-24/604-M dated 3 July 2025, following the settlement negotiations conducted with Gürgençler. In the decision, the allegation is summarised as “an understanding between the two undertakings which took the form of not placing advertisements on each other’s brands and other keywords in advertisements placed through Google, and which is described in competition law as negative matching”.

The Board's Assessment

The Board held that Gürgençler Bilişim İletişim İç ve Dış Ticaret AŞ infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 “through a negative matching agreement which took the form of not placing advertisements on each other’s brands in advertisements placed through Google”, and decided that an administrative fine of TRY 39,161,618.90 be imposed on the basis of its 2024 gross revenue, that a reduction of 25% be applied as a result of the settlement procedure, and that a final administrative fine of TRY 29,371,214.17 be imposed. It was decided that the investigation be concluded by settlement in respect of Gürgençler.

07
Decisions Taken Following Court Judgments
EssilorLuxottica S.A.

The Board’s decision No. 25-48/1166-654 dated 18 December 2025 was published on 15 October 2026. The decision was re-taken following the annulment, by the judgment of the Ankara 8th Administrative Court dated 21 October 2025 (Case No. 2024/1650, Decision No. 2025/1429), of the Board’s decision No. 23-39/749-259 dated 17 August 2023 concerning EssilorLuxottica S.A. The file examined the allegation that the undertaking’s conduct, of a nature that hindered and excluded the activities of its competitors in the optical market, infringed Articles 4 and 6 of Law No. 4054.

The Board's Assessment

In order to give effect to the court judgment, the Board held, by majority, that “the contracts of EssilorLuxottica S.A. under which ophthalmic lenses and ophthalmic machines are supplied together, and its other conduct in the market, created de facto exclusivity and were of a nature that excluded competitors, and that by this conduct it infringed Article 6 of Law No. 4054”, that the undertaking acted contrary to the commitments made binding by decision No. 18-36/585-286 dated 1 October 2018, and that an administrative fine of TRY 67,035,137.10 be imposed on the undertaking. The dissenting opinion annexed to the decision states that the majority view was not shared, on the ground that the sanction imposed was insufficient. This decision relates to a file separate from that which was the subject of the Board’s commitment decision No. 26-35/980-414 dated 23 September 2026.

Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ

The Board’s decision No. 26-06/180-69 dated 19 February 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. The decision was taken pursuant to Article 28 of the Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577 after, in the action brought for the annulment of the Board’s decision No. 20-04/47-25 dated 16 January 2020 finding that Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ had infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054, the 8th Administrative Case Chamber of the Ankara Regional Administrative Court annulled the contested act by its judgment dated 5 February 2026 (Case No. 2026/54, Decision No. 2026/231), following the reversal judgment of the 13th Chamber of the Council of State dated 15 October 2025 (Case No. 2022/2336, Decision No. 2025/3154).

The Board's Assessment

The Board unanimously held that Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 “by restricting sales to its customers by the undertakings with which it was separately in a vertical relationship”. In the decision, an administrative fine of TRY 291,539,391.72 was calculated on the basis of 2024 gross revenues under the fines regulation in force; however, the fines arrived at by applying the provisions of the regulation in force and of the repealed regulation were compared, having regard also to the principle of the “prohibition of reformatio in peius”, and, since the fine under the repealed regulation was found to be more favourable, it was decided that the administrative fine of TRY 16,347,149.29 determined in decision No. 20-04/47-25 dated 16 January 2020 be imposed.

UndertakingDecisionAmount
Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti.26-11/343-130TRY 330,322,816.48
Koruma Klor Alkali Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ25-49/1206-681TRY 328,968,166.55
Economic unit of 2S Kimya and Aykimsan25-49/1206-681TRY 1,887,206.81
Irmak Kimya25-49/1206-681TRY 728,100.78
Süleyman Kimya25-49/1206-681TRY 907,317.86
Nalan Uslu-Anadolu Kimya25-49/1206-681TRY 51,214.72
Kuzey Test Analiz Kimya25-49/1206-681TRY 775,208.68
Arkoz Madencilik26-09/278-99TRY 25,390,876.53
Limak Çimento26-09/278-99TRY 117,556,918.46
Yurt Çimento (territory and customer sharing)26-09/278-99TRY 46,797,203.86
Yurt Çimento (territorial and customer restrictions on resellers)26-09/278-99TRY 16,846,993.39
Carex, Farma Plus and Digital Farma (after settlement reduction)26-15/429-160TRY 4,986,269.18
Gürgençler Bilişim (after settlement reduction)26-16/456-166TRY 29,371,214.17
EssilorLuxottica S.A.25-48/1166-654TRY 67,035,137.10
Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ (under the repealed regulation)26-06/180-69TRY 16,347,149.29
Administrative fines in the decisions covered
08
Reasoning of the Interim Measure Decision in the Instant Noodle Market

The Board’s reasoned decision No. 26-35/988-419 dated 23 September 2026 was published on 13 October 2026. The decision concerns the request for the application of an interim measure against Adkoturk Gıda San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. pursuant to the fourth paragraph of Article 9 of Law No. 4054. The decision states that the application, which was entered in the Authority’s records on 25 May 2026 with requests for confidentiality and an interim measure, contained the allegations that the undertaking prevented competition in the relevant market by abusing its dominant position in the instant noodle market and excluded its competitors from the market through practices giving rise to de facto exclusivity. The opening of the investigation and the interim measure decision were made public by the Authority’s announcement dated 7 October 2026 and were reported in the previous legal update dated October 2026.

The Board's Assessment

The Board unanimously decided “to apply an interim measure, until the final decision, to the effect that free products, delisting budgets, activity budgets, visibility support and similar commercial advantages offered to points of sale are not to be provided, in order to prevent competition infringements that may occur in the relevant product market subject to the investigation and the irreparable harm they may cause”. The interim measure decision does not contain a finding of infringement, and the investigation is ongoing.

09
DSM Grup's Request for the Lifting of Its Commitments

The Board’s decision No. 26-11/344-131 dated 2 April 2026 was published on 15 October 2026. The decision concerns the request for the lifting of the commitments which were submitted within the scope of the investigation conducted, pursuant to the Board’s decision No. 23-49/940-M dated 19 October 2023, in order to determine whether DSM Grup Danışmanlık İletişim ve Satış Ticaret AŞ infringed Law No. 4054 through an automatic pricing mechanism, and which were made binding by the Board’s decision No. 24-40/950-409 dated 3 October 2024.

The Board's Assessment

The Board unanimously decided to reject the request for the lifting of the commitments made by the undertaking in its petition dated 6 March 2026. The Board nevertheless decided that commitment No. 10 be amended so as to provide for the submission of annual reports to the Authority in respect of commitments Nos. 1 to 7, with the first report to be submitted in the last quarter of 2025 and the last report in the last quarter of 2027, and for the submission of information to the Authority, in respect of commitment No. 4, on the parameters taken into account in the Buybox algorithm and on whether the criterion subject to the commitment is taken into account.

Decision No.Decision datePublication dateSubject
26-35/988-41923 Sep 202613 Oct 2026Adkoturk: interim measure reasoning, instant noodle market
26-11/343-1302 Apr 202615 Oct 2026Media Markt: hub-and-spoke cartel
26-09/278-9912 Mar 202615 Oct 2026Grey cement: territory and customer sharing
26-15/429-16022 Apr 202615 Oct 2026Carex, Farma Plus, Digital Farma: resale price maintenance (settlement)
26-16/456-16630 Apr 202615 Oct 2026Gürgençler Bilişim: negative matching in Google advertisements (settlement)
25-48/1166-65418 Dec 202515 Oct 2026EssilorLuxottica S.A.: decision re-taken following court judgment
26-06/180-6919 Feb 202615 Oct 2026Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ: decision following court judgment
26-11/344-1312 Apr 202615 Oct 2026DSM Grup: request to lift commitments rejected
25-49/1206-68125 Dec 202516 Oct 2026Chlor-alkali: collusion in public procurement
Reasoned decisions covered in this update
10
Conclusion

In the period 13 October 2026 – 19 October 2026, the Competition Board announced its decision to open investigation No. 26-37/1006-M against ten undertakings on the allegation of collusion in catering service procurement tenders; the announcement contains no finding of infringement. In the reasoned decisions published in the same period, the Board imposed administrative fines of TRY 330,322,816.48 on Media Markt Turkey Tic. Ltd. Şti. for a hub-and-spoke cartel, TRY 328,968,166.55 on Koruma Klor Alkali Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ for collusion in public procurement of chlor-alkali products, and, for territory and customer sharing in the grey cement market, TRY 117,556,918.46 on Limak Çimento, TRY 46,797,203.86 on Yurt Çimento and TRY 25,390,876.53 on Arkoz Madencilik. Two files concerning resale price maintenance and negative matching in Google advertisements were concluded through the settlement procedure; after the settlement reduction, administrative fines of TRY 4,986,269.18 were imposed on the economic unit of Carex, Farma Plus and Digital Farma and of TRY 29,371,214.17 on Gürgençler Bilişim.

In the decisions taken following court judgments, it was held that EssilorLuxottica S.A. infringed Article 6 of Law No. 4054 and that an administrative fine of TRY 67,035,137.10 be imposed, while in respect of Yurtiçi Kargo Servisi AŞ it was decided that an administrative fine of TRY 16,347,149.29 be imposed under the more favourable repealed regulation. The reasoning of the interim measure decision concerning Adkoturk was published, DSM Grup’s request for the lifting of its commitments was rejected and the reporting commitment was amended.

Full briefing noteDownload the bilingual PDF version of this briefing note.
Download PDF

Related reading

CompetitionDevelopments in Turkish Competition Law — October 2026: The EssilorLuxottica Commitments, and the Investigation and Interim Measure in the Instant Noodle Market12 October 2026CompetitionCompetition Law Developments in Türkiye: September 202628 September 2026CompetitionTurkish Competition Board Decisions — June–August 2026: Conditional Clearances, the Commitment Procedure and New Investigations5 September 2026