On September 17, 2024, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced the structure of the new Commission and her nominees to serve as Commissioners for the upcoming 5-year term (2024-2029). Each of these nominees will be scrutinized and need to be confirmed by the EU Parliament in the coming weeks.
On September 14, 2024, China’s SAMR published streamlined notification and publicity forms for cases reviewed under its simplified merger review procedure (“Simple Cases”). The revised forms will take effect as of October 12, 2024.
In this episode of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by a panel featuring Jackie Holland, Cleary partner and former Senior Director of the UK Office of Fair Trading; Ricardo Zimbrón, former Director of Mergers at the Competition & Markets Authority and currently a partner at Cleary; Alexander Baker, CEO, Fingleton; and John Gray, Partner, FGS Global, to discuss the implications of the new Labour Government for competition enforcement and practice in the UK. Their conversation covers an array of topics, including the new government’s growth agenda, the role of politics in antitrust enforcement, merger control, consumer protection, digital regulation, and much more.
In the latest instalment of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by the team of lawyers
On September 3, 2024, in a landmark decision, the European Court of Justice – the EU’s highest court – ruled in favor of Illumina in its challenge to the EC’s unprecedented assertion of jurisdiction over a transaction that met no notification thresholds at either EU or Member State level.
On September 5, 2024, the European Commission (“Commission”) published a Staff Working Document[1] summarizing the outcome of an evaluation of Regulations 1/2003 and 77/2004, which govern the procedural framework for enforcing EU competition rules under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (“EU Antitrust Enforcement Framework”). On the same day, the Commission adopted a report on the use of interim measures by National Competition Authorities (“NCAs”).[2]
In the latest instalment of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Martijn Snoep, Chair of
In the latest instalment of our Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Barry Hawk, one of antitrust
On July 29, 2024, the Court of Justice issued its preliminary ruling in case C-298/22 Banco BPN v. BIC Português and others.[1] The Court confirmed that a “standalone” exchange of information between competitors – meaning that the information exchange in question constitutes the examined conduct in itself and is not ancillary to any other conduct – can be deemed a restriction of competition by object under Article 101 TFEU. This ruling is important because it clarifies that information exchange can constitute a restriction by object, even if it is not linked to a wider anti-competitive practice and no actual market impact has been shown.[2]
On July 17, 2024, the General Court dismissed ByteDance Ltd (“ByteDance”)’s appeal against the Commission’s decision designating ByteDance as a “gatekeeper” under the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”).[1] This marks the first judgment interpreting the DMA’s provisions and clarifying some of its intervention thresholds. The General Court’s ruling follows its earlier rejection of ByteDance’s application for interim measures.[2]