ARTICLE
2 December 2020

New Competition Authority Decision On Non-compete Obligations To Boost Start-up Investments In Hungary

SA
Schoenherr Attorneys at Law

Contributor

We are a full-service law firm with a footprint in Central and Eastern Europe providing local and international companies stellar advice. As the go-to legal advisor for complex commercial matters in the region, Schoenherr aims to use its proximity to industry leaders, in developing practical solutions for future challenges. We keep a close eye on trends and developments, which enables us to provide high quality legal advice that is straight to the point.
In recent years Hungary, especially Budapest, has become a thriving start-up centre in the CEE region. In 2016 the Government adopted a Digital Start-up ...
Hungary Antitrust/Competition Law

In recent years Hungary, especially Budapest, has become a thriving start-up centre in the CEE region. In 2016 the Government adopted a Digital Start-up Strategy which effectively facilitates start-up investments by adopting favourable regulatory instruments and funding.

Until a recent decision of the Hungarian Competition Authority ("HCA"), competition law posed a notable obstacle to investments in start-ups. Investors usually require founders to undertake non-compete obligations for a certain period. This means that when exiting the start-up after a successful buyout, the founders cannot compete with the buyer on the same market. Such non-compete clauses guarantee that the full value of the assets are transferred to the buyer, including both physical assets and know-how. However, they must be limited in time, and in terms of geographical and personal scope.

In its prior practice the HCA allowed such non-compete obligations only for a three-year term as of the investment if the seller kept a minority share in the company. But in the case of start-up companies, the founder (who possesses all the know-how) usually remains with the company and only exits completely at a later stage. If after three years the founders could compete with the company in which they still hold a minority share, it would undermine the value of the capital investment.

Therefore the HCA decided that in the case of a capital investment, the founders who remain with the start-up company as minority stakeholders can be lawfully prevented from imposing parallel competition during the entire term of their minority ownership and up to two years after the termination of the minority ownership.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More