Slovak antitrust cases (PMU / AMO)

# AMO cases of one company
GET /api/v1/companies/:ico/amo-cases
  → data.cases[]: decision_type, proceedings_start, sector_nace, has_cartel, ruling_summary, detail_url

# Summary fields in the company response
GET /api/v1/companies/:ico
  → data.amoCaseCount, amoHasCartelHistory, amoLastDecisionDate, amoSanctionsTotalCents

# Top cases (public endpoint, no key)
GET /api/v1/public/stats/amo-cases?limit=50
GET /api/v1/public/stats/amo-cases?cartelOnly=1
GET /api/v1/public/stats/amo-cases.csv

# Advanced search: cartel history filter
GET /api/v1/companies/advanced-search?has_amo_cartel=1&country=sk

What is the PMU / AMO?

The Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic (PMU, internationally AMO) is an independent central state authority under Act No. 136/2001 Coll. on the protection of competition (ZOHS). It handles 4 types of case: cartels (§ 4 ZOHS), abuse of a dominant position (§ 8), mergers (§ 9) and state aid (TFEU Art. 107-108). Its website antimon.gov.sk has no public API, so we read the HTML register of decisions.

What is collected and how often?

We read antimon.gov.sk/prehlad-rozhodnuti/, the paginated HTML list of all public decisions. Currently: 0 decisions, 0 rulings (separate operative parts: one cartel decision can cover 5 parties), 0 party records (0 of them matched to a company ID by name, similarity threshold 0.6). Time range: unknown. Refreshed weekly (Saturday 11:00 UTC).

How does a KYC/compliance analyst use it?

GET /api/v1/companies/:ico/amo-cases returns the company's historical PMU cases with their type (cartel/merger/abuse/state aid). Combine it with /compliance: a cartel within the last 5 years costs -10 points in the credit score (a hard-stop factor), an older one -5. For portfolio screening: advanced-search?has_amo_case=1&has_amo_cartel=1 returns companies with a proven cartel. Useful for public procurement (exclusion grounds under EU Directive 2014/24/EU Art. 57).

Do you have the fine amounts?

Partly. The PMU register list carries only a summary of each decision; the fine is in the PDF of the full decision. We parse those PDFs for phrases like "pokuta vo výške XX EUR" / "pokutu v sume XX Sk" (decisions up to 2008 were in Slovak crowns). A ruling has three distinguishable states, not two: the amount is known · the decision imposes no fine (the vast majority: merger clearances) · the decision imposes several fines at once and we cannot tell which belongs to which party. In the third case amo_sanctions_total_cents is NULL, not zero: zero would mean "received no fine". Some rulings have no public PDF at all (hearing minutes). Total fines in the database: €20.6 M (from companies.amo_sanctions_total_cents).

How is a company matched to a decision, and what are the risks?

By name: companies.name_normalized % amo.decision_parties.party_name_normalized (PostgreSQL pg_trgm trigram similarity) with a threshold of 0.6, SK and CZ only. Risks: (1) false matches on common names (the "Slovenská" prefix), (2) missed matches on diacritics or typos (the top cases need a manual check), (3) historical reorganisations (Slovenský plynárenský priemysel a.s. split into 5 entities; a 2005 decision stays with the parent). For high-stakes due diligence always follow the source link to antimon.gov.sk from /companies/:ico/amo-cases and check by hand.

Licence, and can it serve as compliance evidence?

The source data is public under Act No. 211/2000 Coll. (free access to information). The licence is per feed: every feed declares its own licence in the JSON license field and in the CSV attribution header; the overview is at /data-sources. Some upstream sources carry non-commercial restrictions that pass on to derived data. It is not a substitute for an official PMU confirmation: for compliance reporting or court evidence always cite the direct link to antimon.gov.sk/detail/SLUG as the authoritative source. We are a discovery layer (company ID → list of cases) and an analytics layer (trends, sector split).