Nadine Mouy

The pre-notification phase has proved to be a useful mean to address “upfront” many of the issues that a concentration may raise, without being bound by the strict timetable of the formal review process. It works well but there is arguably still some room for improvement. The pre-notification (...)

This set of three papers is derived from the training session organized by the Concurrences Review that was held on 10th July 2012 in Paris. The contributions examine the case of multiple notifications in the context of merger control rules. Concentrations: How to manage multiple (...)

The Ryanair/Aer Lingus case has recently revived a debate regarding the need for an ex ante review by competition authorities of the acquisition of minority shareholdings. Indeed, the concept of "control", which is used by a majority of the competition authorities, is in essence an ill-suited (...)

One of the first questions that naturally arises is that of the legal scope of these RAGs, as explained in paragraphs 12 and 13, both vis-à-vis the CCLA and vis-à-vis the companies that will invoke it. Can you say a word about that? What are, in a synthetic way before returning to certain (...)

The credibility of the system of merger control relies on the fact that firms comply with the remedies. The importance of this issue has been increased by the development of behavioural remedies and by the increasing complexity of the different types of structural remedies. In this context, the (...)

The incremental costs test is now currently used by the competition authorities. However, the various criteria of this test are subject of intense debates among scholars and practionners. This article gathers four different points of view on this issue, among which an economist, a lawyer, a (...)