BBVA-Sabadell Sparks Regulatory Battle
Between EU and Spain BBVA's hostile takeover bid for Banco Sabadell has triggered a regulatory and political tug of-war in Spain — and drawn the attention of Brussels. Spain's Minister of Economy confirmed that any Sabadell-related transaction will be assessed using broad public interest criteria including market concentration, regional banking access, employment and social policy.
Despite conditional approval from the Spanish competition authority (CNMC), the government expressed opposition to BBVA's offer and the deal is escalated to the Council of Ministers for final review. The Council has 30 days to issue its opinion.
The European Commission has voiced concerns about potential political interference, emphasizing that the deal has already been approved by relevant regulatory authorities like the European Central Bank and CNMC. The Commission expects Spain to align with EU banking integration goals and has indicated it will intervene if national decisions violate European regulations, highlighting that consolidation can enhance banking efficiency and profitability.
The Minister has stated that the national regulatory process is legal and compatible with EU rules, allowing for consideration of broader public interest issues. The government's decision will focus on employment, credit access, and territorial banking presence.
Golden Power, Golden Problems: Unicredit-Banco BPM Deal in Chaos
Italy's application of its "golden power" rules has created legal and regulatory uncertainty around UniCredit's proposed takeover of Banco BPM. These rules allow the government to impose binding conditions on transactions that may affect strategic national interests. UniCredit is challenging the conditions before the Lazio Regional Administrative Court and has also expressed support for the European Commission's preliminary review under the EU Pilot mechanism, which can precede a formal infringement procedure.
The Italian financial markets regulator, CONSOB, has suspended the offer period for 30 days in order to give both UniCredit and Banco BPM shareholders sufficient time to assess the implications of the golden power restrictions. Banco BPM has described the suspension as unusual and inconsistent with past regulatory practice. It has filed its own case before the administrative court, which is scheduled to be heard on 10 June, following the dismissal of an emergency appeal.
Separately, UniCredit has raised concerns about Banco BPM's recent acquisition of Anima Holding, arguing that the transaction was executed on materially less favourable terms than initially indicated and lacked sufficient market disclosure. UniCredit claims that the deal weakened BPM's capital position and reduced the expected return on investment. Nonetheless, UniCredit has chosen to waive specific conditions related to the Anima acquisition and has maintained that the offer still meets its financial criteria.
Banco BPM, on the other hand, has accused UniCredit of not disclosing to the market the details of its analysis concerning the Anima acquisition, arguing that UniCredit's public comments have been misleading and have caused confusion regarding the transaction.
AstraZeneca Agrees to Pay USD 50.9M to Settle Pay for Delay Claims
On May 29, 2025, AstraZeneca agreed to pay USD 50.9 million to resolve class-action claims accusing the company of delaying the launch of a generic version of Seroquel XR, a medication used for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. The settlement is pending approval from the Delaware federal court. The 2019 lawsuit alleged that AstraZeneca conspired with Handa Pharmaceuticals to postpone the generic's market entry. Handa Pharmaceuticals also agreed to pay USD 494,000 to settle related claims. CDF Gets a Red Card for Dominance Abuse in Football Broadcasting! On 29 May 2025, Chile's Supreme Court upheld a USD 28 million fine imposed by the Competition Defense Tribunal (TDLC) on Canal del Fútbol (CDF) for abusing its dominant position in the live broadcasting of national football championship matches. The Court also granted the appeal by the National Economic Prosecutor's Office (FNE), banning several anti competitive practices previously allowed by the TDLC.
Among the prohibited practices are fixing minimum resale prices and restricting promotional offers by cable TV operators for premium and HD CDF channels. CDF must also stop setting arbitrary minimum subscriber numbers and conditioning access to premium channels on the distribution of the basic CDF channel to all customers.
The Court ruled that these practices collectively amount to abuse of dominance, causing anti competitive effects and unfairly extracting revenues from the market.
Germany's Bundeskartellamt Cracks Down on Construction and Consumer Electronics Sectors
EUR 10.5 million Fine for Road Repair Companies Over Bid Rigging
The German competition authority Bundeskartellamt fined seven road repair firms for colluding to rig bids and allocate customers in public tenders. It was found that these companies were coordinating in advance who would win contracts and set minimum bid amounts, even holding breakfast meetings near Berlin to finalize plans. The cartel spanned several German states and involved contracts ranging typically from EUR 40,000 to EUR 200,000. The Bundeskartellamt stressed that such illegal agreements harm public procurement and ultimately the public purse. One company received leniency for cooperating, and all fines are now final.
Nearly EUR 6 million Penalty for Sennheiser and Sonova for Vertical Price Fixing in Consumer Audio Electronics
Between 2015 and 2022, Sennheiser and Sonova engaged in vertical price-fixing by coordinating with authorized retailers to control retail prices of premium headphones in Germany. The companies monitored online prices closely and pressured retailers to increase prices when necessary. Despite employees receiving antitrust training, these practices continued until a dawn raid in September 2022. Both companies cooperated with authorities, resulting in a settlement and reduced penalties. Notably, retailers involved were not fined.
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.
