Vertical agreements are widely accepted because they are less likely to solve competition problems than horizontal agreements. Horizontal agreements are concluded between two current or potential competitors. It is only when a contextual assessment has a “sufficiently damaging” effect on competition (or the absence of credible welfare virtues) that an agreement can be considered an “object” within the meaning of Article 101, paragraph 1, of the EUTF.  “Vertical agreement.” Merriam-Webster.com Legal Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, agreement www.merriam-webster.com/legal/vertical%20. Access November 27, 2020. Article 101, paragraph 1, of the TFUE prohibits agreements between companies that have the purpose or effect of restricting, preventing or distorting competition within the Union and which affect trade between EU Member States. This prohibition is relevant to all agreements between two or more companies, whether they are competitors. In addition, vertical agreements appear to be more effective in commercial activity. The most common vertical restrictions are whether a vertical agreement actually restricts competition and whether, in this case, the benefits outweigh the anti-competitive effects, often depends on the market structure. Under the category exemption and the Commission`s current guidelines, the above restrictions would normally be considered “hard-core.” The inclusion of a “hardcore” restriction automatically eliminates the potential benefits of safe port of the category exemption for the entire agreement. Section 4 of Competition Protection Act 4054 (the “Competition Act”) prohibits any agreement between companies with the purpose or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition.
The types of agreements mentioned above include vertical agreements. Vertical restrictions such as resale price maintenance (RPM), most advantageous clauses for customers, exclusive transactions, discount schemes, non-competition clauses and reverse non-competition clauses are often a success in the history of competition law enforcement in Turkey. The above restrictions can also be summed up as “purpose” restrictions within the meaning of Article 101, paragraph 1, of the TFUE. Regulation (EC) No. 330/2010  exempts vertical agreements from the prohibition in Article 101, paragraph 1 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which meet the requirements for the exemption and do not contain so-called “strict” restrictions on competition. The main exception concerns vehicle distribution agreements which, until 31 May 2013, are subject to a three-year extension of the Council`s Regulation (EC) (EC) No. 461/2010 (Regulation (EC) No. 1400/2002 .
 Although the latter regulation is Regulation (EC) 330/2010 relating to agreements relating to the repair of motor vehicles and the distribution of spare parts from 1st It also complements Regulation 330 with three additional “hardcore” clauses A vertical agreement is a term used in competition law to refer to agreements between companies operating at different levels of the production and distribution chain (for example. B relationships between producers and their customers/distributors). Provided they do not contain specific restrictions (as defined in the category exemption regulations), a number of vertical agreements may benefit from the protection of class exemptions, avoiding the prohibition of Section 4. Below is a list of exemption regulations by category that may apply, among other things, to vertical agreements. Depending on the particular circumstances surrounding each individual case, some of the following rules may or may not apply to vertical agreements: a vertical agreement is a term used in competition law to refer to agreements between companies at different levels of the supply chain.