Point of law: whether an explanatory letter of the Federal Antitrust Service, which says that it is unlawful to create the subject of public sale (tender) by putting together works on preparation of project documentation and works on the organisation of construction, conforms to the law.

Alternative attitudes: 1) the explanation does conform to the law, because such works relate to different markets, and also because persons who prepare project documentation and those who perform construction works are members of different self-regulatory organisations; or 2) the explanation does not conform to the law, because the legislation does not contain such provisions.

Ratio decidendi: the Court came to conclusion that the second approach is legally correct.

Practical consequences: the letter containing such explanations is deemed to be invalid. This decision is final, because the opportunity for its reversal by way of supervisory procedure is lost due to the expiry of periods.