M&A Deals Reported to the European Commission Hit New High, Deal Rejection and Amendments Rise
The report by Thomson Reuters also showed increasing number of M&A deals being submitted for harsher scrutiny by the EC.
April 24, 2019 at 06:08 AM
4 minute read
Competition lawyers saw a record number of M&A deals reported for review to the European Commission (EC) last year and the pace looks set to continue. The number of deals rejected or amended after EC scrutiny also jumped sharply.
Latest figures released by media and information group Thomson Reuters show that the EC was notified of 414 deals for general review in 2018, compared with 380 in 2017. This figure is a record high and has not been above 400 since 2007.
DLA Piper head of competition Sam Szlezinger said: "This work soaks up a huge amount of manpower and it's been stretching us to further our capabilities. As a result, we've been expanding both here in London and in Brussels."
The number of deals being rejected or amended has also risen after reaching phase one or two of scrutiny – phase one being the first stage for more high-profile deals, and phase two being the top level of scrutiny where the deal is reviewed thoroughly by a large group of EC lawyers.
Between 2004 and 2009, 42 percent of M&A deals in phase two were rejected or amended by the EC. This rose to 54 percent between 2009 and 2013, and to 63 percent between 2013 and 2018. In 2018, 12 deals were submitted for phase two scrutiny, compared with seven the previous year.
This shows the competition body increasingly cracking down on transactions amid political concern over the impact of market power.
Karen Williams, head of practical law competition at Thomson Reuters, said in a statement: "The flood of major M&A deals across the EU has driven the European Commission's interventionist approach. It remains concerned over the changing dynamics of the tech market but that does not mean it is ignoring concentration in more traditional industries."
Szlezinger added: "There are a lot of technology mergers around and some high-profile deals. The commission has had to review mergers while also looking at the abuse of dominance."
Recent cases investigated by the EC include: a new joint venture of two major global steel suppliers – Thyssenkrupp and Tata Steel (legal advice by Slaughter and May and Linklaters); the merger of two European rail operation companies – Siemens and Alstom (legal advice by Latham & Watkins and Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton); and the purchase of the European assets of US telecoms business Liberty Global by telecoms company Vodafone (legal advice by Linklaters and Allen & Overy).
According to Chambers rankings, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Linklaters, and Slaughter and May are the top three firms for competition law in London.
Figures from the U.K.'s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) report show that the CMA reviewed 62 transactions in the year to last April. This figure is relatively low: in 2005/06 the figure was 210, and 100 in the period 2012/13.
Phase two reviews for the CMA however have risen to 11 between April 2018 and March 2019, compared with six in the 2017/18 period, and eight in the 2016/17 period.
DLA Piper's Szlezinger said this shows that more and more deals are falling under the category of very high profile.
He said: "One thing to think about, of course, is Brexit and how the mergers notified to the commission will be handled by the CMA after the U.K. leaves the EU.
"Handling M&A deals requires huge resources on the part of the commission and on the part of the parties involved so that's interesting… the CMA will have a lot more work to do after Brexit."
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
© 2024 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 AllApple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readDLA Piper, Heuking & Other Key Moves as German Legal Market Reshuffles Ahead of 2025
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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