Released on Dec 18, 2025
This article argues that advances in AI will require a fundamental shift in how competition law, particularly Article 101 TFEU, conceptualises information exchange. Drawing on cybernetics and information theory, it reframes ‘agreements’ as measurable exchanges of mutual information between systems. As AI-driven markets become black boxes, intuitions about what it means to ‘agree’ will no longer apply. Enforcement will depend on statistical analysis of machine data flows. Shannon’s concept of information as entropy will be key to how authorities develop the technology needed to detect information exchange and apply the so-called ‘Bob Test’ in a fully algorithmic marketplace.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
The digitalisation of markets and the rise of algorithmic pricing tools have introduced new challenges for competition law, particularly in assessing when parallel conduct may amount to technologically facilitated coordination. This article examines how EU and Turkish competition authorities have adapted their analytical and enforcement approaches to address algorithmic interactions capable of producing coordinated outcomes without explicit communication. By drawing on case law, policy papers and enforcement priorities, it demonstrates a growing recognition that algorithmic tools and automated market responses require more nuanced frameworks to preserve effective competition in digitalised markets.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
Portugal has undergone a profound shift in competition enforcement in recent years, marked by more assertive public enforcement, most notably in the context of labour markets. In parallel, the emergence of class actions seeking large damages – driven by a permissive procedural regime – has placed new pressures on public enforcement, particularly leniency. While such claims risk undermining incentives to self-report, labour market cases appear less exposed to follow-on litigation, which likely explains why Portugal’s leniency regime is not as dormant as elsewhere. This article assesses these developments and considers how public and private enforcement could be better aligned going forward.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
This article examines the state of the art of damages actions following the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (CJEU’s) judgment in Case C-21/24 CP v Nissan (‘Nissan’), which set a new precedent as regards to determining the starting point of the limitation period for damages actions based on antitrust infringement decisions of national authorities that have not yet become final. Although the judgment in Nissan offers greater protection to injured parties and increases certainty when exercising the right to compensation, the real effectiveness of damages actions will also depend on the ability of national legal systems to remove other procedural obstacles, to harmonise national regimes, to make costly litigation sustainable and to coordinate the interaction between public and private enforcement.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
In this article, the authors propose a foreseeability-based framework for analysing algorithmic collusion under Indian competition law. As pricing and optimisation algorithms increasingly learn from and respond to one another, alignment may arise without human communication, challenging traditional tests for inferring anticompetitive agreements under Section 3 of the Indian Competition Act. The authors argue that liability should hinge on whether firms could reasonably anticipate alignment based on system design choices. By shifting the evidentiary focus from intent to the predictable behaviour of technical systems, this article offers a method for determining when algorithmic coordination should be considered anticompetitive.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
In this article, the authors propose some guiding principles to determine FRAND compliant app store fees. The authors argue that FRAND app store fees should reflect the incremental value of the services they offer, not the value of access to the market itself. They should also account for the value provided to app stores by hosting apps, reflecting the two-way exchange. Finally, they should not reflect the value of network effects, which is the source of market power for the gatekeepers. Such a price ensures that the gatekeeper and app developer are both fairly rewarded for the value of their services and is the most direct way to ensure both fairness and contestability in app distribution.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
China’s merger control regime is undergoing significant transformation, with the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) increasingly aligning enforcement with national and industrial policy objectives. Recent reforms have streamlined procedures, while proactive reviews, tailored remedies and heightened scrutiny of strategic sectors, are creating challenges and opportunities deal parties and industry players. Through case studies and global comparisons, this article examines how China’s approach is evolving, offering commentary for dealmakers and policymakers navigating the country’s competition law framework.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
This article examines the investigation launched by the Brazilian Competition Authority (CADE) into the Soy Moratorium, a multi-stakeholder agreement aimed at curbing deforestation. The investigation is a key development in Brazil’s treatment of sustainability agreements under competition law. The case stems from allegations that the Moratorium operates as a coordinated refusal to purchase soy from non-compliant producers. CADE’s preliminary view characterised the arrangement as a potential buyer cartel, prompting sweeping preventive measures later partially suspended by Brazilian courts. This article compares Brazil’s approach with emerging international guidance, underscoring regulatory uncertainty and the need for clearer CADE standards on environmental cooperation.
Released on Dec 18, 2025
Released on Dec 18, 2025
Released on Dec 18, 2025
Released on Dec 18, 2025
This article reviews a landmark ruling issued by the Uruguayan Administrative Litigation Court (TCA), which annulled a major penalty imposed on pharmaceutical company Roche International for allegedly abusing its dominant position through bundled sales to the leading public medications buyer FNR. The TCA found no anti-competitive conduct, highlighting FNR’s countervailing power and the legitimacy of these subscription-based ‘Netflix-style’ agreements. The ruling clarifies key concepts under Uruguayan competition legislation, including the legitimacy of certain business models and the limits of enforcement faculties of the national competition authority. The case sets a significant precedent for the pharmaceutical sector, public procurement and beyond.
Released on Aug 15, 2025
This article outlines the recent reforms in Ukraine’s merger control regime, including key legislative changes introduced in 2024 under the first stage of antitrust reform. These updates – such as revised notification thresholds, streamlined rules for minority acquisitions, and clearer JV classifications – aim to reduce the regulatory burden for global transactions. The article also examines the quasi-FDI screening performed by the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine, wartime enforcement trends, and the growing alignment with EU standards. Finally, it offers insights into the second stage of reform and the implications for cross-border deals involving Ukrainian nexus.
Released on Aug 15, 2025
This article provides one of the first English-language legal analyses of the draft Guidelines on Vertical and Horizontal Agreements issued by the Saudi General Authority for Competition (GAC). While grounded in the existing Competition Law and its Implementing Regulations, the draft Guidelines aim to clarify the application of key legal provisions and introduce a structured analytical framework for assessing vertical and horizontal agreements. The article distinguishes clearly between the binding legal obligations under the law and the interpretive role of the Guidelines. It also examines how the Guidelines adopt an effects-based approach to exemption analysis under Article 8 and align with international enforcement trends.
Released on Aug 15, 2025
This article discusses the adequacy of powers of Mexican antitrust authorities to avoid and sanction barriers to competition. The author argues that under Mexican law, antitrust authorities have more discretionary powers to penalise barriers to competition than other wrongdoings such as vertical monopolistic practices and essential assets. In addition, this article describes how the authorities have enforced barriers to competition. The above will conclude that the discretion and the manner in which it has been interpreted might convert Mexican antitrust from a sanctionatory agency into a regulatory agency.
Released on Aug 14, 2025
This article explores the recent developments in the Mexican antitrust regulatory framework with the upcoming abolishment of the current Mexican competition authorities, the Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE) and the Federal Telecommunications Institute (IFT, the regulator for the telecoms and broadcasting sectors), as a result of the constitutional reform regarding the so-called organic simplification reform that was published on 20 December 2024 (‘the Reform’). The authors briefly describe the history of Mexican competition law and review the Reform and the three initiatives to replace the Federal Economic Competition Law and create a new competition authority that have been published. In view of these initiatives and, more specifically, the third and last initiative which is expected to be enacted, the authors share their expectations as to how these changes may impact the enforcement of the Mexican competition regime.
Released on Aug 14, 2025
The article deals with the new guidelines on the quantification of fines, compliance programmes and the new communication on leniency programmes adopted by the Italian Antitrust Authority (AGCM) on 10 March 2025. The guidelines on fines establish transparent criteria for calculating penalties, with the aim of ensuring predictability and deterrence. Among the most significant changes are specific calculations for associations of undertakings and bid-rigging conducts, as well as a reduction in the percentage limits for the application of aggravating/mitigating circumstances. The guidelines on compliance programmes allow access to fine reductions only to companies that have adapted compliance programmes prior to an antitrust investigation, in order to encourage all companies to adopt a compliance programme. The notice on leniency programmes contains updates aimed at providing greater precision, harmonisation and clearer incentives for compliance and leniency.
Released on Aug 14, 2025
Released on Aug 13, 2025
The recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Android Auto case represents a development in EU competition law, in relation to the essential facilities doctrine (EFD). The dispute originated from Google’s denial of interoperability between its Android Auto interface and Enel X’s JuicePass application – a refusal sanctioned by the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) as an abuse of a dominant position under Article 102 TFEU. The indispensability test affirmed in the landmark Bronner decision, was reconsidered in Android Auto, where the CJEU opened the door to granting access to a dominant platform, which had been developed as an open model, if it makes a product more attractive to consumers. This article investigates the broader consequences of this doctrinal shift: the gradual weakening of the indispensability threshold in digital environments, the increasing regulatory burdens placed on dominant digital platforms, and the potential ramifications for innovation, investment incentives, and legal predictability.
Released on Aug 13, 2025
This article examines the antitrust treatment of most-favored-nation (MFN) clauses in online travel platforms, focusing on Brazil’s prohibition of wide MFNs and contrasting it with certain US case law. The author explores theories of harm and potential efficiencies, highlighting the complexities of assessing MFNs in two-sided digital markets. Arguing against a blanket ban, the article advocates for a rule of reason approach grounded in evidence and economic analysis. Drawing from selected US precedent, it suggests that Brazilian authorities could adopt a more balanced framework that carefully weighs pro-competitive benefits against potential anti-competitive risks.
Released on Aug 13, 2025
This article explores questions about the fine line between necessary coordination in sports and anti-competitive behaviour. The discussion is based upon the antitrust lawsuit filed by the Professional Tennis Players Association, led by Novak Djokovic, against the four major professional tennis organisations. The plaintiffs allege the existence of a cartel-like structure that restricts competition, limits players’ earnings and autonomy, and imposes abusive disciplinary measures. By analysing the unique characteristics of the sports market and drawing parallels with other antitrust disputes, the article highlights the complexities of applying traditional competition law principles to the world of professional tennis.
Released on Aug 13, 2025
Released on Aug 13, 2025
This article builds on the discussion from the July 2024 edition of CLI regarding whether ‘acquihires’, such as Microsoft’s recruitment of Inflection AI’s staff, are a gap in European merger control. Since then, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) reviewed and cleared Microsoft/Inflection, affirming that acquihires can in certain circumstances fall under UK merger control. Meanwhile, the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Illumina/Grail has curtailed the jurisdiction of the European Commission under Article 22 of the EU Merger Regulation, complicating EU oversight of acquihires. As a result, scrutiny of such transactions will likely shift to individual Member States, with Germany’s Federal Cartel Office, for example, having already examined the Microsoft/Inflection case.
Released on Feb 6, 2025
This article explores the intersection of sustainability initiatives and competition law. It highlights the pressures on businesses to address the serious effects of climate change and the role of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in authorising sustainability collaborations that might otherwise breach competition laws. The authors discuss potential competition law risks, the legal framework and authorisation process in Australia, and compare international approaches. They also suggest improvements to streamline the authorisation process, such as clarifying guidance, fast-tracking certain applications and considering class exemptions to better facilitate sustainability agreements.
Released on Feb 5, 2025
Released on Feb 5, 2025
In this interview, Alejandra Palacios Prieto, former President of Mexico’s Federal Economic Competition Commission (COFECE), reflects on her tenure from 2013 to 2021. She discusses the challenges of promoting competition in Mexico, the importance of international cooperation, and her involvement with the International Competition Network (ICN). Alejandra emphasises the need for leadership changes within the ICN and highlights the operational limitations faced by the organisation. She also shares her vision for the future of antitrust regulation, offering valuable insights for competition law practitioners globally.
Released on Feb 5, 2025
The Illumina/GRAIL Judgment blocks the European Commission’s (the ‘Commission’s) attempt to create a new power under the European Union merger law (EUMR) to de facto call-in and review any transaction it considers potentially problematic. A power that was not based on any specific provision of the EUMR but on the Commission incentivising referrals from EU Member States on the basis of Article 22 of the EUMR, regardless of the solicited Member State(s) being competent to review the transaction under their national law. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided to block the Commission’s creation of such quasi-unlimited review discretion after an extensive review of the EU Merger Regulations’ travaux préparatoires, which clearly showed that legal certainty was one of the key objectives that the EU legislature sought to achieve through the adoption of the EU Merger Regulations, among others, by designing the EU Merger Regulations around a jurisdictional test based on objective, clear and predictable bright-line turnover thresholds.
Released on Feb 5, 2025
This article reviews the most relevant milestones achieved in the enforcement of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) and their significance for the future. A year of notifications of concentrations has seen almost 100 transactions notified; the European Commission (‘the Commission’) adopted a decision on its first in-depth investigation of a concentration; the Commission conducted its first inspection under the FSR on the EU premises of a Chinese undertaking, giving rise to a ruling by the European Union General Court reaffirming its investigative powers. Finally, the Commission has published a document with initial clarifications on some key concepts.
Released on Feb 5, 2025
Recent developments suggest that we may be facing a paradigm shift in competition law enforcement. The increasing focus on industrial policy and the political urge to ‘integrate’ competition policy into it has lead to some serious concerns about the future of competition law. Does this mean that ‘competition law’ will be subjugated to ‘competition policy’? And if this ‘policy’ is integrated into industrial policy, what are the institutional consequences? In this opinion piece, the authors focus on developments within the European Union and Mexico, with the latter being a more extreme and Orwellian version of the former.
Released on Feb 5, 2025