Abstract
The relevance of the study is explained by the increase in the number of contracts entered into by tender, which has caused an increase in the number of cases of illegal (cartel) schemes disclosed by the state body with the use of digital technologies. In this regard, the article is aimed at identifying methods for establishing the presence of a cartel at tenders, including by means of disclosing the use of identical IP addresses by cartel members. The leading approach to the study of the problem of identifying cartel scheme is that its participants do not show the connection between them and the intent of the collusion. Digital technologies make it possible to identify such connection and make it possible, in context with other evidence of scheme presence between parties to identify a cartel, to stop its illegal activities and to not allow an agreement to be entered into at tenders abstracting the law. The article presents an analysis of the norms of legislation, departmental acts of the antimonopoly body and judicial practice in order to identify signs of cartel scheme, including with the use of digital technologies, accounts the grounds for objections of cartel participants to the use of methods to establish illegal collusion by disclosing the fact of identical IP use by tender participants. The materials of the article are of practical value for specialists in the field of antimonopoly law, legal practitioners, government officials specializing in the organization of tenders and the protection of competition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Tsarikovskiy A, Galimkhanova N, Tenishev A, Khamukov M, Ivanov A, Voynikanis E, Semenova E (2018) Antimonopoly regulation in the digital age, 311 s. Higher School of Economics, Moscow
Kloosterhuis E, Mulder M (2013) Competition law on coal-fired power plants. In: 9th ACLE Seminar, Amsterdam, December 12. http://acle.uva.nl/events/competition–regulation-meetings/conference-papers-9th-cr-meeting-2013.html. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Connor J (2014) Cartel overcharges. In: Research in law and economics, vol 29, pp 249–386. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0193-589520140000026008 (March)
Shastistko AE (2018) Allow cartels? http://institutiones.com/general/2597-razreshit-karteli.html. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Tenishev A (2016) Practice of the FAS of Russia on cartel cases and other anti-competitive agreements: events of 2016 and plans for 2017. http://www.consultant.ru/law/interview/tenishev. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Khamukov MA (2017) Electronic evidence of cartels at auction. Bulletin of the University O.E. Kutafina, № 9(37), pp 57–61. https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2017.37.9.057-061
Andrews Ph, Gorecki P, McFadden D (2015) Modern Irish competition law: a practical guide. Kluwer Law International. https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/store/product/modern-irish-competition-law/
Franskevich OP (2017) Collusion in the auction as a form of monopolistic activity. J Bus Corp Law 1(5):16–19
Khabarov SA (2014) Collusion as a form of coordination at the auction. Lawyer 2014(15):33–37
Morselli C, Ouellet M (2018) Network similarity and collusion. Soc Netw 55:21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2018.04.002
Posthuma H (2004) Eyes wide open… To catch bid riggers. SUMMIT 3(7):26
Spagnolo G, Albano G, Buccirossi P, Zanza M (2006) Proventing collusion in procurement: a primer. Handbook of Procurement, Cambridge University Press. https://ssrn.com/abstract=896723. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Ingraham AT (2005) A test for collusion between a bidder and an auctioneer in sealed-bid auctions. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.712881. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Morozov I, Podkolzina E (2013) Collusion detection in procurement auctions. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BPR 25/ EC/ 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2221809. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Mosunova N. (2015) anti-bid rigging policy. Russ Law J, №4. T.3, pp 32–74. https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2015-3-4-32-74
Heimler A (2012) Cartels in public procurement. J Compet Law Econ, 8(4):849–862. https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhs028. Accessed 12 Mai 2018
Petrov DA (2018) “Robotization” at the auction in the digital economy era: a business process or a way to circumvent the law? Civil Law 2018(5):12–15. https://doi.org/10.18572/2070-2140-2018-5-12-15
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dorofeeva, J.A., Tokmakov, M.A. (2020). The Use of Identical IP Address by Tender Participants as an Indication of Cartel Scheme. In: Ashmarina, S., Mesquita, A., Vochozka, M. (eds) Digital Transformation of the Economy: Challenges, Trends and New Opportunities. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 908. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11367-4_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11367-4_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11366-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11367-4
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)