ARTICLE
29 November 2022

More Antitrust Scrutiny For Tech M&A?

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.
Advocate General Juliane Kokott probably caused a few headaches in the technology world when she recently opined in a case referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union that national competition authorities should apply market dominance abuse rules to transactions.
Austria Technology

Advocate General Juliane Kokott probably caused a few headaches in the technology world when she recently opined in a case referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union that national competition authorities should apply market dominance abuse rules to transactions that do not require clearance under EU or Member State merger control regimes.

The case concerns French television broadcaster TDF Infrastructure Holding, which had acquired control of Itas SAS in 2016. In consequence, only two service providers were left on the market: TDF and Towercast. The acquisition did not require merger control filing at the EU or Member State level. Towercast complained about TDF's strong position post-transaction to the French authorities, which referred the case to the ECJ.

There was widespread belief that ever since the merger control regimes were introduced at the EU and EU Member State level, transactions below the jurisdictional thresholds of these regimes would not require further scrutiny under antitrust rules. AG Kokott thinks, however, that a supplementary application of the abuse of dominance regime would help protect competition by catching problematic acquisitions in areas like technology, which do not trigger merger control thresholds. This would make them subject to another layer of scrutiny or to a possible referral to the EU Commission under Article 22 of the EU Merger Control Regime (see here for the respective EU Commission Guidance).

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.

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