Corporate lawyers on edge as China blocks trophy Coke deal
Chinese authorities have blocked a $2.4bn (£1.7bn) bid by Coca-Cola to acquire Chinese beverage maker Huiyuan Juice Group, prompting concerns about the impact the decision will have on M&A in the region. The deal, which would have represented the largest ever takeover of a Chinese target by a foreign company, was rejected in one of the first major tests of the country's recently-adopted antitrust law.
March 25, 2009 at 10:38 PM
3 minute read
Firms gauge China M&A prospects under new antitrust regime
Chinese authorities have blocked a $2.4bn (£1.7bn) bid by Coca-Cola to acquire Chinese beverage maker Huiyuan Juice Group, prompting concerns about the impact the decision will have on M&A in the region.
The deal, which would have represented the largest ever takeover of a Chinese target by a foreign company, was rejected in one of the first major tests of the country's recently-adopted antitrust law.
The deal saw Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom representing Coca-Cola, fielding a team led by Hong Kong-based corporate partner Nicholas Norris and Shanghai-based M&A partner Gregory Miao.
Huiyuan, meanwhile, turned to Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, with the team led by the magic circle firm's Asia head of corporate Rob Ashworth supported by a team including China co-head of competition and trade, Alex Potter, and Beijing-based corporate partner Chris Wong.
The deal had been closely followed as an early example of how China might interpret its new anti-monopoly law, which only came into effect in August 2008. Broadly modelled on western competition laws, the measure also takes into account proposed mergers' impact on "national economic development".
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce rejected the deal after expressing concerns that a monopolistic Coca-Cola would try and exclude domestic competitors from the market. In a statement it said: "If the acquisition of Huiyuan went into effect, Coca-Cola is very likely to take a dominating position in the domestic market and the consumers may have to accept a high price fixed by the company as they will not have more choice."
The decision has surprised many in the market, although opinion among lawyers is divided over the impact it will have on future takeovers of Chinese targets by overseas companies. Statistics from mergermarket show the volume M&A deals involving Chinese targets more than tripled between 2004 and 2007, and more than doubled in value over the same period.
One China-based partner at a magic circle firm said: "Decisions like this cause a lot of uncertainty in the market. It is likely to make people think twice about buying companies in China."
However, Linklaters global head of corporate David Barnes said: "I do not think this will deter clients from attempting M&A deals because China is one of the largest markets in the world. Antitrust laws do not deter people from doing deals in the US and Europe."
Matthew Layton, Clifford Chance's head of corporate, commented: "Any predictions of a severe impact on foreign investment in China are over-stated. Sophisticated investors are well aware of the sensitivities in China around acquisitions of national champions and
famous brands."
For more, see Merger control: China's new anti-monopoly law.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSingapore Leaders Stress the Importance of the Rule of Law Amid Geopolitical Tensions
Can Law Firms Avoid Landing on the 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLetter From Asia: Will Big Law Ever Bother to Understand Asia Again?
Trending Stories
- 1California's Chief Justice Starts Third Year With Questions About Fires, Trump and AI
- 2Justin Baldoni Sues Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds for $400M in New Step in 'It Ends With Us' Fight
- 3Top Leadership Changes Coming for NJ Attorney General's Office
- 4SCOTUSBlog Co-Founder Tom Goldstein Misused Law Firm Funds, According to Federal Indictment
- 5Patreon Hit With Lawsuit for Allegedly Diverting Subscriber Data to Meta
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250