
By: Tobias Pukropski (Antitrust Politics)
International merger control proceedings are a challenge in itself for companies. Potentially facing proceedings in jurisdictions or with regulators in crisis adds an entirely different layer of uncertainty. This post is written from and limited to the view of a practitioner advising companies on merger control proceedings globally. Questions on how to approach these proceedings when regulators or entire countries are in crisis fortunately only come up rarely (even though I wish they would not come up, for anyone, ever).
An example from the recent past: Brazil
In mid-2019, for nearly three months the Brazilian regulator lacked the internal quorum required to take decisions in merger cases, because the government had not nominated new commissioners in time to replace their departing predecessors. This left more than 70 transactions in limbo.
At the time, companies involved in ongoing proceedings – halted for what then was an uncertain period of time – would ask themselves how do deal with the situation and how to plan for their transaction timeline. Some decided not to accept the uncertainty and to instead close their transactions without clearance in Brazil. One of them was IBM, whose acquisition of Red Hat was ultimately cleared unconditionally. However, the parties were also fined approx. EUR 12.4 million for closing the transaction prior to clearance.
Russia
The current situation in Russia has a particular angle – at least for “Western” companies. The EU, amongst others, has imposed heavy sanctions on Russia. The International Competition Network, a global network of competition regulators, has suspended Russia’s regulator from participating in the network. Many companies (and law firms) have announced that they will leave the Russian market and will close their local operations – Russia has reportedly reacted by considering introducing a law to dispossess such companies…
Featured News
Belgian Authorities Detain Multiple Individuals Over Alleged Huawei Bribery in EU Parliament
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Grubhub’s Antitrust Case to Proceed in Federal Court, Second Circuit Rules
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Pharma Giants Mallinckrodt and Endo to Merge in Multi-Billion-Dollar Deal
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Targets Meta’s Market Power, Calls Zuckerberg to Testify
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
French Watchdog Approves Carrefour’s Expansion, Orders Store Sell-Off
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li