In the latest episode of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Gail Slater, former Assistant
In the latest episode of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Gail Slater, former Assistant…
DG COMP has a new Director-General – Anthony Whelan, a long-serving European Commission official who has been at the heart of EU regulation and competition law for over 30 years. Currently DG COMP’s Deputy Director-General for State aid, he has held a wide range of roles over his career: he has worked in the Commission Legal Service, headed the cabinet of former Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, was a Director in DG CONNECT, and advised Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on digital policy.
In the latest episode of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Bjarne Tellmann, CEO of…
In this instalment of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Mike Walker, the CMA’s former…
In the latest instalment of Cleary Gottlieb’s Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by a panel of lawyers…
According to the German Ministry of Economics, the “German Gatekeeper Rule”[1] has proven to be an effective means of ensuring fair competition on digital markets. In its Evaluation, published earlier this month,[2] the Ministry praised the Rule for improving market conditions in the technology sector and promoting innovation and competition since it came into force four years ago. Describing it as a “valuable supplement” to the European Union’s set of gatekeeper rules in the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which has since been introduced, the Evaluation sees no need for further adjustments or harmonization. The requirement for an evaluation after four years was enshrined in the 2021 legislation, which mandated that the Ministry of Economics take into account relevant developments at the European level in its assessment of the Rule.[3]
The following is part of our annual publication Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2026. Explore all topics or download the PDF.
Antitrust in 2025 was marked by policy developments and enforcement that, while remaining aggressive, became less overtly anti-business. The U.S. continued several Biden-era cases but became more open to settlements, while maintaining the new and more burdensome HSR merger notification form and the more aggressive and less economically focused 2023 Merger Guidelines. It also faced leadership uncertainty, particularly at the DOJ. The European Commission conducted DMA enforcement actions and launched a broad consultation on the Merger Guidelines. The UK CMA shifted toward a more restrained approach, taking greater account of growth and signaling flexibility in merger remedies. China’s SAMR began intervening in transactions below filing thresholds and continued using antitrust as a tool amid geo-political tensions.
2025 was a fascinating year for UK competition and consumer enforcement, with the CMA changing its policies and practices in a number of areas. Our Year in Review summarises the most important developments of the past year and what we expect in 2026, as the CMA implements its reworked procedures for merger and market cases, begins to use its new consumer fining powers, and imposes digital conduct requirements for the first time. We also anticipate a Government consultation on significant changes to the decision-making model for mergers and markets.
On December 12, 2025, the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”) High-Level Group (“HLG”)[1] endorsed a joint paper on the regulatory interplay on AI-related issues.[2] This paper assesses how to best implement the different legal frameworks that govern AI systems. It underlines the importance of achieving a coherent and consistent implementation of these frameworks and of the cooperation between competent authorities to achieve it.
On December 18, 2025, the Court of Justice delivered a preliminary ruling in connection with an appeal by OSA, a Czech collective management organization handling copyright and collecting royalties (“CMO”), against an Article 102 TFEU infringement decision of the Czech Competition Authority.[1]
WE VALUE YOUR PRIVACY
This site uses cookies and full details are set out in our Cookie Policy. Essential Cookies are always on; to accept Analytics Cookies, click "I agree to all cookies." Learn more about cookies.