Answer ... The parties to a concentration may offer remedies to address competition concerns. This is not at all unusual. Such voluntary remedies are often made subject to penalty fines for default. Both structural remedies and behavioural remedies may be accepted.
Answer ... Remedy discussions may be pursued at any stage in the notification process. The parties are responsible for introducing such discussions: the Competition Authority will not propose or dictate possible ways to alleviate any concerns. Normally, parties commence discussions after the Competition Authority has formulated its concerns in its statement of objections in Phase II. In such a scenario, the parties would be well advised to submit their formal remedy proposal three weeks prior to the end of Phase II (in other words, no later than approximately two months into Phase II).
However, remedy discussions may also be started earlier with a view to obtaining clearance in Phase I (in such case, the discussion should be raised early in the process in order to work out a deadline with the Competition Authority, as a decision to proceed to Phase II may be taken at any time in Phase I). In such situations, there is clearly a risk that the parties will propose remedies which go beyond what would be required if the Competition Authority were granted the opportunity to conduct a detailed market analysis in Phase II. It may therefore provide some comfort that the Competition Authority has issued Phase I clearance decisions without making them conditional on the remedies proposed by parties. Irrespective of whether a remedy proposal is submitted in Phase I or II, a non-confidential version must also be submitted, to enable the Competition Authority to proceed with a market-testing exercise.
Answer ... As noted above, foreign-to-foreign mergers are caught by the Competition Act when the turnover thresholds are met, and a foreign transaction can be prohibited if it has an effect on the Swedish market, unless remedies are offered to alleviate those concerns. There have been cases in which foreign parties have offered to divest assets to remedy issues on the Swedish market. However, no foreign-to-foreign merger has, to date, been prohibited.