OREANDA-NEWS. October 31, 2011. The Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District confirmed legitimacy of the decision and determination of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) regarding the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Regional Development, reported the press-centre of FAS Russia.

Earlier, Moscow Arbitration Court and the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court also found that FAS decision and determination complied with the existing legislation.

On 21st April 2010, FAS Russia found that the Ministry of Regional Development violated Part 1 Article 15 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”.

The case was initiated upon petitions from software developers of “Grand” Centre” Ltd. and “Association of Software Developers for Construction” Non-Commercial Organization.

Investigating the case, the FAS Commission decided that the Ministry of Regional Development recommended that organizations should use a specialized “Gosstroismeta-Expert” software system, chosen as the basic solution without competitive selection. The FAS Commission classified these recommendations as a violation of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition”.

Also, the Ministry of Regional Development failed to control activities of a subordinate “Federal Centre for Pricing in Construction” Federal Unitary Enterprise, that distributed permits (registration cards, certificates, etc.), and kept a Register of software solutions used for cost estimating. At the same time, the Federal Centre disseminated incorrect information regarding document status. The Commission also classified omissions of the Ministry of Regional Development as a violation of the antimonopoly law.

The Ministry of Regional Development and the “Federal Centre for Pricing in Construction” disagreed with FAS decision and determination and filed a lawsuit to Moscow Arbitration Court.

On 4th April 2011 the Court confirmed legitimacy of FAS decision and determination.

The Ministry of Regional Development did not challenge the judgment of the Court of First Instance. The “Federal Centre for Pricing in Construction”, on the contrary, thought that FAS decision and determination were unlawful, as well as the judgment of the Court of First Instance, so the Federal Centre lodged an appeal. The Appeal Court also upheld the judgment of the Court of First Instance and dismissed the appeal of the “Federal Centre for Pricing in Construction” Federal Unitary Enterprise.