Uniastrum Bank Suspected of Violating Competition Protection Law

UrBC, Moscow, July 19, 2011. Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service took legal action against Investtorgbank: the bank is suspected of violating Article 14 of the Federal Competition Protection Act (unfair competition). The FAS had received a citizen’s complaint regarding Investtorgbank’s refusal to let him top up his Perspective deposit, even though the deposit agreement provided for the opportunity to top up the account. The Service detected that the bank had not been accepting any deposit top-ups since May 2010; this involved Perspective deposits with the deposit period of 732 and 1,097

Sverdlovsk Region’s division of Federal Antimonopoly Service keeps preparing for UralTransBank and Severnaya Kazna’s trials: the two banks are charged with violating the antimonopoly law. The Service is now busy collecting all the papers needed for the case; the first court hearing has been scheduled for November 12, 2007. The Service first took legal action against two Yekaterinburg-based banks in October 2007. UralTransBank and Severnaya Kazna were suspected of limiting competition through signing certain agreements with a number of local insurers and were therefore accused of violating

'A lawsuit against UralTransBank and Bank Severnaya Kazna regarding violation of antimonopoly laws has been filed and is soon to be processed in court. We are now busy collecting all the papers needed for the case. Should we need some more documents, there will probably emerge a court’s ruling suggesting that the two banks in question provide them,’ Deputy Head of Federal Antimonopoly Service’s Sverdlovsk Region division Sergey Volkov said to UrBC. The Service first took legal action against two Yekaterinburg-based banks in October 2007. UralTransBank and Severnaya Kazna were suspected

Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service declared the actions of Uniastrum Bank related to the administration of bank-managed mutual funds to be an act of unfair competition, the FAS’s press service reports. The agency detected that the bank delivered inaccurate information as to investment strategies and the ways of using them via its website and advertising materials; its investment policy statement regarding Premier bank-managed mutual funds was also misleading for both potential investors and the bank-managed mutual funds’ founders. These actions actually violate Article 14 (part 1,

Moscow Court of Arbitration declined the claim placed with it by Home Credit and Finance Bank Ltd and ruled in favor of the Russian Federation Federal Antimonopoly Service’s decision to fine the bank for violating the antimonopoly legislation through unfair competition. The fine was imposed on the bank on December 18, 2008. The Federal Antimonopoly Service stated on September 18, 2008 that Home Credit and Finance Bank had violated Article 14 (part 1, paragraph 1) of the Federal Bill on the Protection of Competition (disseminating inaccurate or false data that could damage other businesses)