The investigation conducted to determine whether İntema İnşaat ve Tesisat Malzemeleri Yatırım ve Pazarlama AŞ (İntema) violated article 4 of the Act no 4054 by determining the resale price of the dealers that resell its products, imposing restrictions about regions/resellers/customers to which dealers would offer products and imposing non-compete clause and exclusive purchasing obligation to its dealers was concluded with settlement and commitment procedure.

İntema was given 64.812.992,37 TL administrative fines regarding the resale price maintenance claim with the settlement text it submitted.

İntema submitted a commitment text concerning the claims that it imposed restrictions in terms of regions/customers to which dealers would offer products regardless of active/passive distinction as well as the non-compete clause and its practices in relation to provisions restricting competition regarding the exclusive purchasing obligation in the agreements it signed with its different dealers. It was decided that the commitments submitted by İntema concerning the said practices shall be accepted, the commitments shall be rendered binding for İntema and the investigation shall be terminated in terms of the said claims. The reasoned decision will include the details of the commitments and the summary of the commitment text submitted is given below:

• The relevant provisions of the agreements signed with resellers having different dealer statuses shall be amended and it shall be clarified that there are no restrictions related to regions and customer groups to which resellers can make active and passive sales,
• For clarifying that the premium system applied to Vitra sales points (VSP) and subdealers is not built on allocation of regions, an information letter explaining that the purchases from authorized dealers outside the region/geographical location where VSP and/or sub-dealer operate are subject to premium - within the framework of the rules of the relevant incentive system- shall be shared with resellers.
• Concerning the provisions restrictive of competition in the agreements that İntema signed with its different sellers,  the noncompete clause in İntema Vitra Sales Point (Bathroom) Agreement shall be omitted from the agreement with respect to “concealed cistern” product groups; provisions restricting competition imposed about exclusive purchasing obligation in İntema Authorized Dealership Agreement and İntema Vitra Sales Point (Bathroom) Agreement as well as İntema Kitchen Authorized Dealership Agreement shall be omitted -without any product exception- from all of the relevant agreements.
• The commitments will be implemented within four months as of the notification of the short decision and all of the commitments will be valid for an indefinite time.

It was concluded that the non-compete clause in article 6(a) of the Authorized Dealership Agreement, which İntema signed with its authorized dealers, can be granted individual exemption.