Home About Us Services Awards Team Insights Career Contact Us TÜRKÇEENGLISH Devin Law & IP — Istanbul
← All Insights
CategoryCompetition
Published5 September 2026
Authors
Uğurcan TekinPartner
İnci ÖzçilsalAttorney at Law
Beyza ErdemirAttorney at Law
Contents1.Introduction2.Prominent Competition Board Decisions on a Thematic Basis3.General Assessment and Conclusion

Turkish Competition Board Decisions — June–August 2026: Conditional Clearances, the Commitment Procedure and New Investigations

This information note has been prepared for the purpose of presenting the current approach in competition law practice and assessing the legal implications of this approach across different sectors, within the framework of the final decisions, conditional clearance decisions, interim measure decisions and investigation openings announced on the website of the Competition Authority during the June–August 2026 period. In the Board's recent practice, it is observed that behavioural and structural commitments are accepted in combination in mergers and acquisitions, that infringement investigations are increasingly concluded through the commitment and settlement procedures, that the interim measure instrument is resorted to while investigations are ongoing, and that the exercise of intellectual property rights is subjected to competition law scrutiny.

The selected decisions have been classified under thematic headings and examined in a manner that reveals the Board's established approach. The purpose of this study is to contribute to ensuring that, in the planning of commercial activities and transactions, due consideration is given not only to the provisions of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition but also to the Board's current and consistent practice, thereby supporting the anticipation of potential compliance risks and the development of a preventive legal perspective.

Introduction

Within the scope of this information note, from among the announcements made by the Competition Authority between 1 June and 31 August 2026, decisions that shed light on commercial practices frequently encountered in practice, that are of precedential value and that are considered to provide guidance across different sectors have been selected. The prominent developments of the period are the conclusion of the investigation conducted in the automotive tyre sector with administrative fines totalling TRY 3,633,935,171.32; the termination of the investigations concerning Coca-Cola Satış Dağıtım and subscription-based video platforms through the commitment procedure; the conditional clearance, within the framework of commitments, of the A101 and CarrefourSA, Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery, and Cargill and PNS acquisitions; the interim measure decision adopted in respect of Haribo; and the opening of an investigation into TEVA on the allegation of the strategic use of divisional patent applications. Under the methodology followed in this study, the relevant Board decisions are first set out by way of brief summaries and direct quotations, and the practical implications of these decisions and the fundamental principles they establish are subsequently assessed.

Between June and August 2026 the Competition Board relied on conditional clearances, commitments, interim measures and new investigations in combination.

Prominent Competition Board Decisions on a Thematic Basis

Conditional Clearance Decisions in Mergers and Acquisitions

During this period, the Board granted conditional clearance to three major acquisition transactions within the framework of the commitments submitted by the parties. The common feature of the decisions is that, in markets where it was established that effective competition could be significantly impeded, structural commitments (the divestment of stores or shareholdings) were accepted together with behavioural commitments (price monitoring, continuity of supply, licensing), and that the decisions expressly state that a daily administrative fine will be imposed pursuant to Article 17 of the Law in the event of a breach of the commitments.

The Board's established approach: For commitments to be accepted, they are required to be 'sufficient, appropriate and proportionate to remedy the competitive concerns identified, and capable of being implemented within a short period'. Commitments submitted to foreign competition authorities may be supplemented with additional commitments specific to the Turkish market; monitoring mechanisms, such as the monitoring of price and cost data through independent auditor reports and the possibility for the Board to revoke measures adopted under extraordinary circumstances, are becoming part of commitment packages.

Organised Retail: A101 and CarrefourSA

The Board conditionally cleared the acquisition of sole control of Carrefoursa Carrefour Sabancı Ticaret Merkezi A.Ş. by Yeni Mağazacılık A.Ş. by its decision of 30 July 2026 (Decision No. 26-27/789-331). The decision assessed that, as a result of the transaction, effective competition could be significantly impeded in the market for 'organised retailing of fast-moving consumer goods'; the commitment package submitted by A101 was, however, accepted. The commitments include the divestment of a total of 48 stores in respect of which competitive concerns were identified (10 A101 and 38 CarrefourSA stores), the continuation of CarrefourSA's activities under a separate organisational structure, the preservation of employment levels for three years following closing, the inclusion of at least 75 SMEs or local producers in a support programme in each calendar year, and the implementation of a communication strategy based on an 'umbrella brand' approach for regional products. The decision is noteworthy in that, in addition to structural and behavioural commitments, public policy elements such as employment and supplier protection were incorporated into the commitment package.

Media and Entertainment: Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery

The Board conditionally cleared the acquisition of sole control of Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. by Paramount Skydance Corporation by its decision of 20 August 2026 (Decision No. 26-30/866-361). In the file, concerns were identified in the markets for 'the distribution of films for theatrical release', 'the wholesale supply of TV channels' and 'subscription-based video-on-demand (SVOD) services'. Under the commitments also submitted by Paramount to the European Commission, the shareholding in UIP Türkiye will be terminated and no joint distribution structure will be established with Universal in Türkiye; under the additional commitments specific to the Turkish market, it was accepted that theatrical films will be 'made available in Türkiye, on market terms, for licensing to third-party platforms' following the expiry of the three-year exclusivity period on the parties' own SVOD platforms (for five years from closing), that agreements currently in force with Digiturk, TV+, Tivibu, D-Smart and other linear TV providers will, upon request, be extended on the same terms until 31 December 2029, and that TV channels will be licensed to third parties on market terms. The decision demonstrates that commitments structured around content licensing and exclusivity periods have become a principal instrument of merger control in the media sector.

The Food Industry: Cargill and PNS Pendik Nişasta

The Board conditionally cleared the acquisition of sole control of PNS Pendik Nişasta Sanayi A.Ş. by Cargill Tarım ve Gıda Sanayi Ticaret A.Ş. by its decision of 30 June 2026 (Decision No. 26-23/685-275). It was established that effective competition could be significantly impeded in the sub-market for 'glucose syrup and blends'; the behavioural commitments accepted focus on three concerns: limiting price increases for quota-regulated products in domestic sales to specific cost elements, with price and cost data monitored by the Authority for five years through reports of independent sworn financial advisers; terminating existing agreements only on objective grounds and notifying the Authority of supply interruptions; and refraining from using revenue derived from quota-regulated products in a manner that finances other product groups. The Board also ruled that price adjustments and supply interruptions made under extraordinary economic conditions may be revoked by the Board.

Investigations Concluded through the Commitment and Settlement Procedures

During this period, the Board concluded investigations in the fast-moving consumer goods distribution, digital media and pharmaceutical sectors through the commitment and settlement procedures. The common feature of the commitment decisions is that they contain detailed, schedule-bound obligations relating to concrete commercial practices such as cooler and shelf space, exclusivity periods and talent agreements.

The Board's established approach: Commitments are tied to time limits running from the notification of the short-form or reasoned decision and are rendered binding by a Board decision. Obligations arising from previous Board decisions remain in force alongside the new commitments. The settlement procedure, while involving a finding of infringement and an administrative fine, may be combined with commitments in the same file.

Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Distribution: Coca-Cola Satış Dağıtım

The Board terminated the investigation conducted in respect of Coca-Cola Satış Dağıtım A.Ş. by accepting the comprehensive commitments submitted by the company. According to the announcement dated 1 July 2026, the commitments encompass: by the end of 2026, the separation, by means of a vertical divider, of a 35% area in each of the Coca-Cola coolers at all sales outlets such as grocery stores, kiosks, small markets and restaurants, to be opened to all producers of carbonated and non-carbonated non-alcoholic beverages that do not have their own coolers, with no Coca-Cola products to be placed in this area and no materials obstructing the visibility of competing products to be kept on cooler glass; the abolition of the minimum annual case purchase condition in return for the provision of coolers and of the completion invoice practice; the abolition of the bonus scheme for area sales managers and the limitation of field sales bonuses; the limitation of the annual investment budget to a specific proportion of the previous year's net sales turnover, with support items such as awnings, signage and shelving not being made conditional upon the removal of competing products; the determination of discounts applied to dealers on the basis of independent and objective criteria per product category; and the complete abolition of free product support in the water and soda categories. The announcement also recalled that the obligations to which the company is bound under previous Board decisions, such as the prohibition on exclusivity, separate contracts per category and the two-year limit on contract duration, remain in force.

Digital Media: Subscription-Based Video Platforms

The investigation initiated in respect of Netflix, BluTV, Disney, Amazon Prime, Exxen and Gain by the Board's decision of 27 February 2025 (Decision No. 25-08/185-M) was concluded with the acceptance of the commitments submitted by the parties by the decision of 30 April 2026 (Decision No. 26-16/498-181), announced on 12 June 2026. The investigation examined whether Netflix had acted in a discriminatory manner in the selection process of independent producers for the production of its original Turkish content, as well as the exclusivity clauses in the agreements concluded by all of the platforms with producers, distributors and talent. Netflix committed to producing, for five years, a specific proportion of its branded Turkish content with production companies with which it has not previously worked; to organising, for three years, an annual 'Pitch Day' at which at least eighty participants may present; to responding to project applications in writing and with reasons within no more than 120 days; to shortening the exclusivity period for branded Turkish films and applying a revenue-sharing model; to granting producers non-exclusive distribution rights outside Türkiye for series; and to acquiring the rights to original musical works only for the duration of the exclusivity period. In respect of all of the platforms, it was committed that no agreements containing direct or indirect exclusivity clauses will be concluded with talent such as actors, directors and screenwriters for branded Turkish content to be released in Türkiye, that the roles of casting director, producer and talent agent will not be combined within the same economic unit, and that no agreements imposing non-compete obligations on Turkish producers will be concluded. The decision is one of the first comprehensive examples in which contractual practices relating to copyright and neighbouring rights have been regulated through competition law.

The Pharmaceutical Sector: Avixa and Avigem

The Board concluded the investigation conducted in respect of the economic unit consisting of Avixa İlaç and Avigem İlaç through the commitment and settlement procedures by its decision of 23 July 2026 (Decision No. 26-26/748-308). The foreclosure of competitors' market entry and the creation of loss to the public purse, effected by keeping below a 1% market share the one of two nasal sprays with identical content and formula, distributed under a co-marketing agreement, to which the higher discount applied under the Social Security Institution reimbursement scheme, was characterised as an exclusionary and exploitative practice within the scope of Article 6 of the Law, and an administrative fine of TRY 23,813,011.31 was imposed. By the same decision, commitments concerning the suspension and cancellation of the marketing authorisation of the product with low availability and its removal from the scope of reimbursement were rendered binding.

The automotive tyre investigation produced the period's largest sanction, with administrative fines exceeding TRY 3.6 billion in total.

A Cartel Investigation Concluded by Settlement and Final Decision: The Automotive Tyre Sector

The investigation initiated in the field of automotive tyre production and distribution by the Board's decision of 21 November 2024 (Decision No. 24-49/1091-M) was concluded by the final decision of 4 June 2026 (Decision No. 26-20/612-242). The investigation examined allegations of concerted practices concerning price movements among competitors, the exchange of competitively sensitive information, the determination of dealers' resale prices, territorial and customer restrictions, discrimination and non-compete obligations, together with allegations of information exchange directed at the labour market and no-poaching arrangements.

The Board's established approach: Competitively restrictive information exchange directed at the labour market and no-poaching agreements are assessed, together with infringements in the product market, as a separate element of infringement within the scope of Article 4 of the Law and are taken into account in the calculation of the administrative fine. Undertakings that apply for settlement while the investigation is ongoing receive reduced fines by separate decisions; in the final decision, full fines are determined in respect of the undertakings that do not settle. In respect of time-barred infringements, findings are made but no fine is imposed.

The Settlement Decisions and the Final Decision

In the course of the investigation, administrative fines totalling TRY 497,091,986.13 were imposed as a result of settlement on the undertakings that applied for settlement: TRY 396,868,582.22 on Petlas (Abdulkadir Özcan Otomotiv Lastik), TRY 67,720,838.07 on Tatko, TRY 8,263,636.19 on Üstündağ Lastik and a total of TRY 24,238,929.65 on four dealers. By the final decision, administrative fines totalling TRY 3,136,843,185.19 were imposed, comprising TRY 1,019,069,577.64 on Brisa Bridgestone Sabancı, TRY 672,292,698.43 on Goodyear Lastikleri, TRY 397,294,083.93 on Otomotiv Lastikleri Tevzi, TRY 206,763,817.24 on Prometeon Turkey and varying amounts on the other producer and the dealers; the total administrative fines imposed within the scope of the investigation reached TRY 3,633,935,171.32. The Board further held that the non-compete obligation applied by Brisa to its dealers in the forklift tyre market benefits from the block exemption under Communiqué No. 2017/3, that the allegation of discrimination could not be proven in respect of certain undertakings, and that the infringement was time-barred in respect of two dealers pursuant to Article 20 of the Misdemeanours Law; it also imposed obligations aimed at preventing indirect information exchange through dealers pursuant to Article 9 of the Law.

Interim Measure Decisions

During this period, the Board exercised its interim measure power under the fourth paragraph of Article 9 of the Law, aimed at preventing harm that would be difficult to remedy while an investigation is ongoing, in the soft candy market.

The Board's established approach: Interim measures are applied, prior to the final decision, in the form of a specific and measurable behavioural obligation (such as the allocation of shelf or stand space to competitors); implementation of the measure is required to commence within one month of the notification of the reasoned decision and to be documented to the Authority, failing which it is stated that an administrative fine will be imposed pursuant to Article 17 of the Law.

The Interim Measure in respect of Haribo

While the investigation initiated in respect of Haribo Şekerleme under Articles 4 and 6 of the Law by its decision of 5 March 2026 (Decision No. 26-08/238-M) was ongoing, the Board decided to impose an interim measure by its decision of 4 June 2026 (Decision No. 26-20/605-241). Under the measure, in traditional sales outlets of 200 square metres and below, an area corresponding to 30% of the stand volume in the visible part of all Haribo stands, on the vertical plane and in a single block, will be allocated to the products of competing brands that do not have a soft candy stand at the relevant sales outlet, together with a label reading 'This area is reserved for competing products'. Together with the cooler access rule in the Coca-Cola commitments, the decision demonstrates that the allocation of physical space in the distribution channel has become one of the Board's primary intervention instruments.

The new investigation announcements cover allegations ranging from patent strategies to public tenders.

New Investigations and a Sector Inquiry

During this period, the Board opened investigations in the pharmaceutical, agricultural chemicals and nuclear medicine sectors and submitted the preliminary report of its pharmaceutical sector inquiry for public consultation. The investigation opening announcements cover allegations of the strategic use of intellectual property rights, the exchange of competitively sensitive information and collusive conduct in public tenders.

The Board's established approach: The use of the procedural possibilities afforded by the patent system for the purpose of delaying generic competition after the expiry of the basic patent term may be examined as an abuse of a dominant position within the scope of Article 6 of the Law. The sharing among competitors of information such as product-based prices, sales volumes, targets, payment terms and discount rates is assessed as to whether it is of a nature 'capable of leading to coordination by reducing strategic uncertainty among competitors'.

The Strategic Use of Divisional Patent Applications: The TEVA Investigation

By its decision of 6 August 2026 (Decision No. 26-28/804-M), the Board opened an investigation into the economic unit consisting of Teva İlaçları, Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe B.V. and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. The investigation concerns whether TEVA engaged in 'conduct restricting generic competition by using divisional patent procedures for strategic purposes and by creating a misleading image before health authorities regarding the efficacy and safety of competing products'. The Board will assess whether divisional patent applications relating to the manufacturing process and dosage regimen, filed after the expiry of the protection period of the basic molecule patent, together with the withdrawal practices connected with those patents, are of a nature that restricts generic pharmaceutical competition. As it demonstrates that patent filing strategies are subject to scrutiny under competition law, the investigation should be followed closely from the perspective of industrial property practice.

The Agricultural Chemicals and Nuclear Medicine Investigations

By its decision of 6 August 2026 (Decision No. 26-28/802-M), the Board initiated an investigation under Article 4 of the Law into eighteen undertakings active in the plant protection and plant nutrition products market, including BASF, Syngenta, FMC, Nufarm, UPL and Sumi Agro, on the allegation that they shared 'various items of competitively sensitive information such as product-based prices and sales volumes, targets to be achieved, applicable payment terms and discount rates'. By the decision of 30 April 2026 (Decision No. 26-16/481-M), an investigation was opened into eleven undertakings active in the nuclear medicine market on allegations of collusion and concerted practices, primarily in the PET/CT and radiopharmaceutical tenders of public hospitals.

The Preliminary Report of the Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry

The preliminary report of the pharmaceutical sector inquiry initiated by the Authority's decision of 8 December 2021 (Decision No. 21-59/844-M) was published on 10 August 2026. The preliminary report addresses, at the production stage, 'the relationship between patent protection, intellectual property law and competition law'; it assesses the balance between the dynamism encouraged by intellectual property protection in the sector and the openness of market entry conditions, and analyses the competition problems that may arise through manipulation of the regulatory framework in the market entry process, as well as public pharmaceutical procurement at the distribution level. The Authority is accepting views on the findings and policy recommendations of the preliminary report by e-mail, and announced by its notice of 31 August 2026 that a workshop will be held within the scope of the sector inquiry.

General Assessment and Conclusion

The Competition Board's practice in the summer period of 2026 clearly reveals three trends. First, in merger control, conditional clearance has become an instrument under which structural and behavioural commitments are accepted together and supported by monitoring mechanisms such as independent auditor reports, notification obligations and the Board's power of revocation; in the media sector, content licensing and exclusivity periods lie at the centre of the commitments. Second, the commitment and settlement procedures are becoming widespread in infringement investigations; however, as in the tyre sector, administrative fines at the level of billions of Turkish lira are imposed by final decision on undertakings that do not settle, and labour-market information exchange and no-poaching agreements are included in the fine calculation as a separate element of infringement.

Third, the exercise of intellectual property rights is becoming a direct subject of competition law scrutiny: the TEVA investigation into the strategic use of divisional patent applications, the treatment of the relationship between patent law and competition law in the preliminary report of the pharmaceutical sector inquiry, and the video platforms' commitments on copyright and talent exclusivity demonstrate that this area of intersection is expanding. In conclusion, the allocation of physical space in the distribution channel, exclusivity and target mechanisms in agreements concluded with dealers and sales outlets, any form of information sharing with competitors, and patent filing strategies should be at the centre of competition law compliance processes in this period.

Related practice areaCorporate Law & Commercial Advisory→

Related reading

RegulatoryTürkiye’s First Climate Law Adopted by the Grand National Assembly14 June 2026CorporateExpulsion of a Shareholder in Two-Shareholder Limited Companies After the Constitutional Court's Judgment of 17 March 202626 March 2026RegulatoryAmendment on Fees Chargeable to Consumers in Food and Beverage Services16 February 2026