In May 2026 the National Assembly adopted at first reading a Bill amending and supplementing the Protection of Competition Act (PCA), which provides for significant changes to the regime governing unfair commercial practices, as well as to the powers of the Commission for Protection of Competition (CPC). The proposals are primarily aimed at strengthening the protection of weaker participants in the supply chain, as well as at expanding the mechanisms for intervention in cases of suspected infringement of the competitive environment.
One of the main focuses of the draft bill is the significant expansion of the list of prohibited unfair commercial practices. In addition to the already familiar forms of economic pressure and abuse of a stronger bargaining position, the draft provides for the introduction of new hypotheses that will be treated as unfair commercial practices, including: the unilateral amendment of contractual terms, the unjustified transfer of commercial risk to the suppliers, the refusal to provide written confirmation of reached arrangements, as well as additional payment obligations unrelated to the subject matter of the supply. The aim is thus to cover a wider range of practices which at first glance appear contractually permissible and lawful, but in practice lead to a significant imbalance between the parties.
Particular attention should also be paid to the introduction of the so-called “conditional prohibitions” – a concept implying that unfair commercial practices will no longer be exhaustively listed, but rather assessed on a case-by-case basis in light of the trader’s specific conduct, its economic effect, the relevant market context, and its impact on competition. Instead of certain practices being classified as automatically prohibited, in a number of cases an assessment will be required as to whether the conduct in question leads or could lead to a restriction of competition, an unfair transfer of economic risk or an unjustified infringement of the interests of the weaker party. In this regard, the introduction of a so-called ‘anti-circumvention mechanism’ is also envisaged, under which actions or contractual arrangements that have the object or effect of circumventing or evading the prohibitions are also considered unfair commercial practices where they lead to the same economic effect.
The above approach aligns more closely with the trends observed in European competition law, where the assessment predominantly focuses on the economic analysis of the specific market effects of the trader’s conduct. In other words, the assessment is carried out on a case-by-case basis, rather than through an exhaustive ex ante definition of the situations constituting unfair commercial practices.
In addition, it is proposed to extend the powers of the CPC by allowing it to impose interim measures even during pending proceedings, where a risk of serious harm to competition or consumer interests is established. Powers are also introduced for the CPC to require participants in the supply chain to prove that a particular practice is not unfair, by demanding any form of evidence. This legislative solution is fully justified, as the regulatory authority should have at its disposal the necessary mechanisms to establish the relevant facts of each case and effectively counter unfair commercial practices.
The proposal regarding the creation of an electronic register for traceability along the supply chain is also noteworthy. It is envisaged that a mechanism will be introduced for collecting and maintaining information on the movement of certain goods, the terms of commercial relations and the pricing parameters along a supply chain. Although the specific scope and mode of operation of the register are yet to be finalised, the measure is clearly aimed at increasing market transparency and facilitating the CPC’s supervisory functions. From a practical perspective, such a tool could significantly expand the Commission’s capabilities to conduct sectoral analyses, track price changes and identify potential coordinated practices or abuses along the supply chain, which would have a significant impact primarily on the end consumer.
The concept of “joint dominant position” is also introduced, which is traditionally considered one of the more complex concepts in the field of competition law. CPC could examine not only the individual market power of a specific undertaking, but also the existence of economic interdependence or coordinated market behaviour between several participants who, together, may exert a significant influence on the market. It also provides for expedited proceedings (with a time limit of up to three months) in cases of suspected infringements relating to a joint dominant position. Although the concept is familiar in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, its more active incorporation into the national regulatory framework could lead to an expansion of the scope of control over highly concentrated markets, including retail (in this regard, trade in agricultural, food and raw materials), energy and digital services. In this context, particular importance will be attached to the manner in which the CPC applies the criteria for establishing a joint dominant position, including the degree of market transparency, economic interdependence between market participants and coordination of market behaviour, as well as preventive control.
The proposed amendments to the Protection of Competition Act signal a trend towards strengthening regulatory control over the market behaviour of undertakings and expanding the mechanisms for protection against unfair commercial practices. If the bill is adopted in its current form, the changes could significantly affect the way in which commercial relations are structured and conducted in a number of economic sectors.
This material has been prepared for and forms part of a legal information bulletin produced by the law firm “Penkov, Markov and Partners”. The publications contained therein do not constitute legal advice and are not binding. “Penkov, Markov & Partners” reserves all rights to this material, and any distribution thereof is subject to the prior written consent of the law firm.
