The Danish Competition and Consumer Authority has for the first time applied the Danish call-in rules on transactions not exceeding the Danish merger control thresholds.
In July 2024, the Danish Competition Act was amended to give the Danish Competition and Consumer Authority ("DCCA") the power to call in for review transactions which do not exceed the merger control thresholds, provided that (i) the parties have a combined Danish turnover of at least DKK 50 million (approx. EUR 6.5 million), and (ii) the DCCA finds that the transaction entails a risk of a significant impediment of effective competition (a "SIEC").
The DCCA has now used this new power for the first time – and in fact issued two call-in decisions in just two days.
Firstly, by decision of 25 August, the DCCA has called in Uber's acquisition of the Danish taxi company Dantaxi, citing competitive concerns in the markets for taxi dispatch/booking services and taxi transport services due to a lessening of competitive pressure between dispatchers, a risk of coordination of taxi transport prices and Uber achieving a significant market share within the market for taxi dispatch/booking services.
Secondly, by decision of 26 August, the DCCA has called in the acquisition by OneMed, a wholesaler of medical supplies, devices and services, of Kirstine Hardam, a wholesaler of in particular ostomy care products. The DCCA will investigate whether the transaction will give rise to concerns in the market for wholesale supply of ostomy care products to municipalities by creating a player with a significant market share.
The Uber/Dantaxi transaction was already closed ahead of the call-in decision, meaning that failure to obtain clearance could force the parties to rewind the transaction. The OneMed/Hardam transaction was however not completed ahead of the DCCA's call-in decisions, meaning that completion now have to await the DCCA's investigation and eventual clearance.
While application of the call-in rules have no sectoral limitations, the preparatory works indicate that a particular aim of the rules was "killer acquisitions" in innovative markets. It is therefore interesting, although not unexpected, that one of the two first cases concerns a "traditional" trading market.
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.
