The state takes precautions to ensure legislation of national and international binding rules related to prevent competition-restrictive actions or abuse of dominant position. In this context, The Competition Authority has been established with administrative and financial autonomy equipped with regulatory and supervisory duties and powers, and also capable of taking decisions with the power of enforcement, in order to fulfill the obligations specified and to control the market. The administrative fine is the one of the main sanction that the authority will exercise. Related code sets administrative fines at varying rates depending on the type of the violation. These rates shall be applied on the basis of the annual gross incomes at the end of the fiscal year closest to the date of final decision or if the final decision is not possible, it will be calculated for the end of the previous fiscal year and thus the amount of administrative fines shall be determined. However, hesitations as to what should be understood from the term of “final decision” in the code leads to unfair consequences, either in the determination of non-fines and in the event of cancellation of sanctions after the judicial review. In particular, when a decision is taken to implement the judicial decision as a result of the annulment proceedings, there are practices that contradict some basic principles of the law in terms of determining the turnover year to be based on the maximum penalty rate. The fact that the use of the right to freedom of rights reveals a burden that is not envisaged by the law for persons and the fact that the administration has to bear more severe fines due to the unlawful conduct of the administration are open to criticism in terms of the basic principles of law and international legislation.