European Union

On November 1, 2025, the Commission issued a policy brief[1] in which it rejected calls to extend the legal professional privilege to in-house counsel communication. The Commission examined the question after stakeholders called for such an extension as part of the revision process of the regulation governing antitrust investigation, Regulation 1/2003.[2]

As part of our response to the European Commission’s consultation on possible reforms to its merger control guidelines,[1] we submitted our observations on Topic Paper G – Public Policy, Security, and Labour Market Considerations.

Introduction

In May 2025, the Commission launched a public consultation on possible reforms to its merger guidelines, covering seven core topics that underpin how the Commission assesses the competitive impact of mergers.[1] On October 29, the Commission summarized the main trends of the 243 responses[2] it received.[3] The highlights are as follows:

As part of our response to the European Commission’s consultation on possible reforms to its merger control guidelines,[1] we provided our views on Topic Paper E – Digitalization.

In July 2025, the European Commission launched a consultation about its revision of the EU antitrust procedural rules.[1] This is part of a comprehensive evaluation that the Commission initiated in March 2022, to ensure that the procedural framework for the EU’s antitrust enforcement remains “fit for the digital age” after its enactment 20 years ago.[2]

As part of our response to the European Commission’s consultation on possible reforms to its merger control guidelines,[1] we provided our views on Topic Paper D – on Sustainability and Clean Technologies.

In the past year, the General Court has ruled on several challenges to Commission dawn raids initiated against Symrise,[1] Michelin,[2] and Red Bull,[3] clarifying the limits of the Commission’s investigatory powers. In all three cases, the General Court upheld the legality of the inspections,[4] though refined the evidentiary and procedural standards governing dawn raids.[5] The most recent Michelin and Red Bull judgments, in particular: (i) clarified what constitutes “sufficient indicia” for the Commission to initiate a dawn raid; (ii) validated the Commission’s use of new digital tools to gather indicia for dawn raids and its practice of gathering information onsite and later reviewing that information over extended periods of time at the Commission’s premises (“extended inspection”); and (iii) confirmed the Commission’s margin of discretion in selecting the most appropriate investigative measure—such as dawn raids or requests for information—in antitrust investigations.

As part of our response to the European Commission’s consultation on possible reforms to its merger control guidelines,[1] we provided our views on Topic C – Innovation And Other Dynamic Elements In Merger Control.