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 - Apple is under investigation by the Swiss Competition Commission for potential violations of Swiss competition laws regarding its mobile payment service, Apple Pay, and its access policies for third-party app providers [1]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The Swiss Competition Commission's Secretariat initiated a preliminary investigation on December 10, 2025, to assess the competitive landscape for mobile payment apps on iOS devices [1]. - The investigation will evaluate whether Apple's access policies for the NFC interface on iOS devices comply with Swiss antitrust laws [3]. Group 2: Access to NFC Interface - Apple allows third parties to access the NFC interface on iOS devices through a secure platform, which is designed to prioritize user security and privacy [2]. - Access to the NFC interface was not granted to external developers until 2024, and since late 2024, Swiss third-party app providers have been given access to this platform [2][3].

Group 1 - Mr. Neset Kockar, a shareholder of AB Novaturas, currently holds a 23.2% stake and is considering increasing it to approximately 33% [1][2] - The submission of notifications to competition authorities in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia is a precautionary measure and part of a planned process since Mr. Kockar's initial investment [2][4] - A 33% shareholding could potentially give Mr. Kockar "sole control" of the company due to low attendance rates at general meetings, which may allow him to hold a de facto majority of votes [3][4] Group 2 - AB Novaturas is a tour operator with over 25 years of experience, offering a wide range of travel destinations from the Baltic States [5] - In 2024, the company reported revenues of EUR 201 million and served 239,000 passengers across Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia [5]

Core Points - France's antitrust authority fined Apple €150 million ($162 million) for abusing competition law related to its App Tracking Transparency (ATT) feature [3][5] - The French Competition Authority criticized the implementation of ATT, stating it was not necessary or proportionate to its goal of protecting personal data [4][6] - The fine covers the period from April 2021 to July 2023, which is relatively small compared to Apple's revenue of $124 billion in the last quarter of the previous year [5] Implementation Issues - The rollout of ATT led to an overwhelming number of consent pop-ups from third-party apps, complicating the user experience on iOS [6] - The authority noted that the system disproportionately affected smaller app publishers who rely on third-party data for financing [6] Company Response - Apple defended ATT, stating it enhances user privacy control with a clear and consistent prompt for tracking consent [7] - The company expressed disappointment with the decision but noted that the French Competition Authority did not mandate any specific changes to ATT [8]