Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court of Latvia upheld the decision of the Administrative Regional Court, confirming a fine of EUR 135 thousand imposed on KIA Auto AS for competition law violations, with TKM Grupp AS jointly liable for EUR 95 thousand, marking the end of the legal proceedings [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The case began in August 2014 when the Latvian Competition Council imposed a fine on TKM Grupp AS and KIA Auto AS for alleged competition law violations related to warranty conditions requiring KIA car owners to use authorized service centers and original spare parts [2]. - After years of litigation, the Supreme Court referred the case back to the Administrative Regional Court in December 2021 for re-examination, emphasizing the need for a thorough analysis of the alleged anti-competitive conduct [3]. - The Regional Court upheld the Competition Council's decision on June 4, 2025, despite extensive evidence provided by KIA Auto AS and TKM Grupp AS, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court [3]. Group 2: Supreme Court Findings - The Supreme Court concluded that the Regional Court's assessment aligned with the guidance from the Court of Justice of the European Union, establishing significant potential anti-competitive effects without needing to identify actual consequences [4]. - The Court noted that the 100% shareholding of TKM Grupp AS over KIA Auto AS creates a presumption of decisive influence over the subsidiary's conduct, which contributed to the dismissal of the cassation appeals [4].

Core Viewpoint - The Administrative Regional Court of Latvia upheld the Latvian Competition Council's 2014 decision against KIA Auto AS and TKM Grupp AS, which imposed a fine for alleged anti-competitive practices related to warranty conditions for KIA vehicles, despite the companies' extensive evidence and arguments to the contrary [1][5]. Summary by Sections Legal Proceedings - The case has been ongoing for over ten years, initiated by a decision from the Latvian Competition Council on August 7, 2014, which KIA Auto AS and TKM Grupp AS are contesting [1]. - The companies plan to submit a cassation claim to the Supreme Court of Latvia, disagreeing with the court's findings [1]. Allegations and Fines - The Competition Council's 2014 decision alleged that KIA passenger car owners were required to perform maintenance only at authorized services to maintain warranty validity, leading to a fine of €135,000 for KIA Auto AS, with €95,000 imposed on TKM Grupp AS [2]. Defense Arguments - KIA Auto AS and TKM Grupp AS argue that the case was based on a single warranty refusal by a third party, which acknowledged that KIA Auto AS was not involved in the decision [3]. - They contend that the warranty conditions allowed servicing at independent centers, provided that maintenance was inspected at an authorized center, and assert that the Competition Council misinterpreted these conditions [3]. Court Proceedings and Rulings - The Supreme Court of Latvia previously referred the case back to the Administrative Regional Court for a comprehensive analysis of the alleged anti-competitive behavior [4]. - After a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Administrative Regional Court resumed proceedings but ultimately upheld the Competition Council's decision, disregarding the companies' evidence and the EU court's guidance [5]. Next Steps - TKM Grupp AS will communicate further steps regarding the litigation to the stock exchange as per regulatory requirements [6].