OREANDA-NEWS. December 14, 2009. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation (SAC RF) supported the position of antimonopoly body that the requirement of a provider of last resort for 100% advance payment under an energy supply contract and direct debiting of funds from a consumer's account for consumed electric energy constitutes imposing unfavourable conditions and violates the antimonopoly legislation, reported the press-centre of FAS Russia.

On 10th June 2008, the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service in the Kursk region (OFAS Russia) found that "Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC violated Part 1 Article 10 of the Federal Law "On Protection of Competition" by exercising actions in abuse of the company's dominant position, which lead or could lead to infringing the interests of an individual entrepreneur Lyulka.

"Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC dominates the retail market for of electric energy in the city of Kursk and is the provider of last resort in the city of Kursk and the Kursk region.

Imperative norms of the current civil law do not provide for advance payments for electric energy. Under Article 544 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, payment is expected for the actual amount of electric energy accepted by the subscriber in accordance with energy accounting data, unless provided otherwise by the law, other normative legal acts or agreements between the parties.

At the same time "Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC forced an individual entrepreneur Lyulka to conclude a contract on "its own" conditions with a 100% advance payment for energy consumption, which, according to an individual entrepreneur Lyulka, were unfavourable as they involved paying for electric energy that was not consumed yet.

Also, "Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC insisted on including into the contract a condition on direct debiting of funds from the payer's account as a payment for consumed electric energy. However, under Article 854 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, debiting monetary funds from an account is made by banks on the basis of client's instruction. Without client's instructions monetary funds can be debited from an account upon a court order and in cases provided for by the law or an agreement between the bank and its clients.

On 6th October 2009, the Presidium of SAC RF considered the claim of "Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC about review by judicial supervision of the ruling of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Central District that pronounced validity of the decision of the Kursk OFAS Russia on recognizing the fact of antimonopoly violation by the company.

The Presidium of SAC RF upheld the ruling of the Cassation Court and dismissed the claim of "Kurskenergosbyt" OJSC.

Therefore, SAC RF confirmed the rightness of the legal position taken by the antimonopoly body on the case.

Emphasizing the importance of the decision of the supreme judicial authority, Vitaly Korolyov, the Head of the FAS Russia's Department for Control over Electric Power Industry, drew attention to inadmissibility of such actions of energy suppliers and providers of last resort, which breach the antimonopoly legislation, and also pointed out at the need to increase control of antimonopoly bodies over the situation on retail electric energy markets, in particular, to take efforts to prevent and suppress imposing such unfavourable conditions upon consumers.