MyEG loses appeal against anti-competition penalty

MyEg online office that opens at Immigration Department of Malaysia in Putrajaya. MOHD SAHAR MSNI/The Star

KUALA LUMPUR: The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has dismissed My EG Services Bhd’s (MyEG) appeal against  the Malaysia Competition Commission’s (MyCC) decision to fine it RM2.27mil for allegedly abusing its dominant position in how it managed online foreign workers permit (PLKS) renewals.

In a filing with Bursa Malaysia, the e-Government services provider said the tribunal had on Thursday upheld the MyCC’s decision with a consequential amendment.

In addition to the financial penalty of RM2.272mil for the infringement periods of Jan 5, 2015, to Jan 22, 2015, and May 2, 2015, to Oct 6, 2015, there is an additional daily penalty amounting to RM7,500 computed from June 25, 2016, to Dec 28, 2017.

MyEG is also to cease and desist immediately from imposing different conditions to equivalent transactions in the processing of mandatory insurances for online PLKS renewal applications.

Furthermore, it must provide an efficient gateway for all its competitors in the market for the sale of the mandatory insurances and allow the other competitors to compete at the same level within 60 days.

MyEG said its board had reviewed the CAT’s decision with the company’s legal counsel and intended to seek a judicial review and also apply for a stay against the CAT’s decision.

“The board of directors wishes to reiterate that the CAT’s decision is not expected to have any material financial and operational impact to the company,” it added.

According to MyCC’s statement in June last year, it found that MyEG, together with its wholly-owned subsidiary MyEG Commerce Sdn Bhd, had infringed the Competition Act 2010 by “abusing its dominant position in harming competition in the downstream market in which MyEG Commerce is participating as an insurance agent for online PLKS renewal applications.”

The competition authority said different conditions were imposed to equivalent transactions with its competitors to the extent that it had harmed competition in the downstream market for the sale of mandatory insurances.