Industries

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.

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.

On January 13, 2026, the Criminal Chamber of the French Cour de cassation (“French Supreme Court”) confirmed its established case law according to which the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) may seize attorney-client documents covered by legal professional privilege (“LPP”) where these were not “prepared for the exercise of a party’s rights of the defense”, i.e., to defend a client who committed, or believes it committed, an offense liable to result in ongoing or anticipated judicial or regulatory proceedings and sanctions.[1]

On January 9, 2026, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) published the results of its third study on the French leniency procedure.[1]  The Study publishes feedback from more than 60 competition law practitioners on (i) the impact of procedural changes introduced in 2023, (ii) the key factors that encourage or discourage undertakings from applying for leniency, and (iii) the impact of potential follow-on damage actions on leniency applications.  The FCA will determine on the basis of the responses whether and how to adapt its leniency program.

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]