KUWAIT Trends and Developments Contributed by: Abdulwahab Sadeq, Adel Alasousi, Ali Boshehri and Barak AlAjeel, Meysan
• the initial review period may be extended for another 90 days if needed; • a final decision from the board of the CPA within 30 days; and • notification to the parties within 15 days. The total review period can be extended to up to 185 days in practice, which is among the longest in the region. Pre-notification consultations Parties may request informal guidance or submit a formal pre-notification consultation (subject to a KWD250 fee). While intended to streamline the process, the CPA rarely issues clearances at this stage, leading most parties to proceed directly to filing. Sanctions and enforcement trends Penalties for non-compliance The penalties for non-compliance are: • a fine of up to 10% of total revenues (poten - tially global revenues) of the parties; • legal action against management; and • possible transaction suspension. Settlement Parties may settle with the CPA for not less than 50% of the penalty. Notable fines In May 2023, the CPA fined a booking app plat - form 5% of revenues for failing to file while in October 2024 it fined 16 exchange companies between 1% and 5% of revenues for cartel behaviour. Constitutional Court ruling on sanctions On 5 February 2025, the Constitutional Court of Kuwait issued a landmark decision (under Petition 4 of 2023) declaring Article 34 (1) of the
Competition Law unconstitutional. This provi - sion had authorised the CPA to impose finan - cial penalties of up to 10% of total revenues for violations of anti-competitive conduct under Articles 5 to 8. Key findings of the Constitutional Court The Constitutional Court found the penalty structure lacked proportionality as it applied uniformly to all violations regardless of severity, actual harm or financial benefit derived. It also considered that the calculation method based on total revenues, regardless of whether the revenues were connected to the breach, was excessive and inconsistent with constitutional protections of private property. The Constitutional Court emphasised the need for a rational connection between sanctions and the objectives of competition enforcement. Penalties must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the benefit gained from the violation. This ruling has created significant uncertainty in terms of enforcement, as the CPA has not yet issued formal guidance on how it will approach penalties in light of the ruling. I) Potential ripple effects This ruling casts serious doubt on the consti - tutionality of Article 34 (2), which imposes an identical 10% penalty for failure to notify “eco - nomic concentrations”. Since this provision uses the same flat rate approach without regard to market effect, future legal challenges are likely. Businesses are now exploring avenues to con - test both past and future fines, while the CPA
346 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook