Alec J. Burnside

The EU has agreed in principle on a strengthened framework to ensure that foreign investment does not threaten security and public order, while keeping the EU open to foreign investment. The draft FDI Regulation does not go as far as introducing an EU screening mechanism whose decisions are (...)

The General Court of the European Union recently held, in Goldman Sachs v. Commission, that purely financial investors such as investment funds may be held jointly and severally liable for competition law violations implemented by their portfolio companies when they can exercise “decisive (...)

Interim measures are among the most powerful enforcement tools that are available to antitrust regulators in the European Union. Pending the outcome of investigations, which typically run into several years, interim measures can be used to ensure that effective competition is maintained, and irreparable damage that is incapable of being remedied is averted. Yet the European Commission (“Commission”) has over the years become increasingly reluctant to impose interim measures in cases involving potential infringements of Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”). The purpose of this foreword is to provide an overview of the law and practice governing the use of interim measures in the EU and three key Member States, namely France, Germany and the United Kingdom (“UK”); and in doing so, identify the factors underlying the inconsistent application of interim measures across those jurisdictions.

The EU lower court has overturned a 2014 merger clearance by the European Commission (EC) following an appeal by a third party. Overturning the clearance does not mean that the deal is now prohibited. Instead, the case goes back to the EC, and the parties have to re-notify. At best this is (...)

EU Court Orders New Assessment of Intel’s Rebates The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has quashed a ruling by the EU’s General Court which had upheld the European Commission’s (EC) 2009 finding of abuse of dominance by Intel Corporation Inc. Intel was fined €1.06 billion, a (...)

It is more than three and a half years since EU Competition Commissioner Joaquín Almunia first publically admitted that, at the European level, when a transaction involves the acquisition of a minority shareholding, there is “probably an enforcement gap” , and announced that he had instructed (...)

This article has been nominated for the 2015 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On Friday, April 4, 2014, the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division (“DOJ”) announced that, for the first time ever, the DOJ successfully (...)

Minority shareholdings feature routinely in EU antitrust law. While there is no customised regime specific to them, in most respects they have been satisfactorily accommodated within the general rules. The European Commission’s June 2013 consultation document invited views on the utility of (...)