François-Charles Laprévote

Follow:Read more about François-Charles LaprévoteFrançois-Charles's Linkedin Profile

The European Commission (EC) has published a draft of its long-awaited revision of the Merger Guidelines (Draft Guidelines), combining the 2004 Horizontal Merger Guidelines and 2008 Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines into a single document that is organized around different theories of harm and endeavors to achieve five principal objectives: (1) to take account of the Draghi Report’s call for more dynamic, forward-looking merger control; (2) to acknowledge the benefits of scale, resilience, innovation, and global competitiveness; (3) to reflect the evolution in EC practice over the past 20 years; (4) to tighten the rules for acquisitions by dominant companies; and (5) to signal a greater readiness to take positive account of efficiencies and other benefits. 

On March 17, 2026, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) fined the National Union of French Ski Instructors (Syndicat national des moniteurs du ski français, “SNMSF”) €3.4 million for imposing an exclusivity obligation on its member instructors.[1] The FCA found that the SNMSF had implemented an exclusivity obligation prohibiting its ski instructors from teaching at competing ski schools or developing their own clientele outside the French Ski School (Ecole de Ski Française,“ESF”) network. The decision confirms the FCA’s continued scrutiny of labor markets and reaffirms that sports activities are subject to competition law. It also marks the first time the FCA has applied Article L. 464-2 of the French Commercial Code, allowing it to seek financial contributions from professional association members (in this case, the SNMSF’s members).

On February 18, 2026, following an ex officio investigation launched in July 2024,[1] the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) issued its Opinion No. 26-A-02 (the “Opinion”) on competition in the online video content creation sector in France.[2]  The Opinion identifies several areas of concern in the sector, including creators’ dependence on a small number of platforms, algorithmic opacity, bargaining-power imbalances with commercial partners, and the competitive implications of generative AI.  It calls on platforms to ensure fair and transparent revenue-sharing conditions, provide greater transparency on recommendation algorithms and content moderation measures, and make available dedicated contact points for creators.

On January 9, 2026, the European Commission published long-awaited guidelines on its enforcement of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (“FSR”) (the “Guidelines”).[1] In addition to delineating the FSR’s jurisdictional scope, the Guidelines clarify three key concepts: (1) when a foreign subsidy distorts competition; (2) how a distortion’s negative and positive effects are balanced against each other (the “Balancing Test”); and (3) when the Commission may use its so-called “call-in powers” to request the prior notification of transactions and public bids that fall below the mandatory FSR thresholds.

On November 10, 2025, the Commission conditionally cleared Abu Dhabi National Oil Company’s (“ADNOC”) c. €15 billion acquisition of German chemicals company Covestro AG (“Covestro”) under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (“FSR”),[1] following a Phase II review.[2]

On November 3, 2025, the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) imposed a EUR 7.6 million fine on the Parfait group for failing to comply with commitments entered into in the context of its acquisition of a hypermarket and shopping center in Martinique (the “Decision”),[1] illustrating the FCA’s continued vigilance regarding effective implementation of merger remedies. The Parfait group has appealed the Decision.

On July 10, 2025, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) published both its 2024 Annual Report,[1] and its 2025-2026 Roadmap,[2] which outlines its priorities for the year ahead. 

In July 2025, the Commission published its draft Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) guidelines for consultation. The guidelines discuss the FSR’s distortion and balancing tests and the EC’s powers to call in “below threshold” mergers and public tenders for ex ante review. 

The Paris Court of Appeal (“Court of Appeals”) has issued its ruling on damages in the Plavix follow-on action brought by France’s national health insurance fund (the “CNAM”) against Sanofi.[1] More than a decade after the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) found that Sanofi had engaged in disparagement practices constituting an abuse of dominant position, the Court awarded the CNAM €150.7 million, reflecting the long-term impact of Sanofi’s conduct. The judgment highlights the magnitude of potential damages in follow-on actions and illustrates how French courts evaluate long-lasting effects and the full-compensation principle.