ZWeR 2020, 153
The 15th anniversary of the SIEC test under the EU Merger Regulation – where do we stand? (Part 2)
Contents
- [Part 1 of the article (chapter I. and II.) was published in ZWeR 2020, p. 1 – 51]
- III. Theories of harm captured under the SIEC test in the Commision’s practice
- 5. Vertical mergers
- 5.1 Commission practice under the dominance standard
- 5.2 Application of the SIEC test prior to the NHMG
- 5.3 Analytical framework under the NHMG
- 5.3.1 Non-coordinated effects
- 5.3.1.1 Ability to foreclose
- 5.3.1.2 Incentive to foreclose
- 5.3.1.3 Overall impact on competition
- 5.3.2 Coordinated effects
- 5.4 The application of the SIEC test under the NHMG
- 6. Conglomerate mergers
- 6.1 Application under the dominance standard
- 6.2 Analytical framework under the NHMG
- 6.2.1 Non-coordinated effects
- 6.2.1.1 Ability to foreclose
- 6.2.1.2 Incentive to foreclose
- 6.2.1.3 Overall impact on competition
- 6.2.2 Coordinated effects
ZWeR 2020, 154
- 6.3 Application under the NHMG
- 6.4 Particularly creative theories of harm – conglomerate mergers
- 7. Treatment of efficiencies
- 8. The counterfactual and the failing firm defense
- 8.1 The failing firm defense
- 8.2 The “flailing firm”
- 8.3 The “alternative counterfactual” outside the failing firm defense
- 9. The “S” in SIEC
- IV. Summary assessment
- 1. Higher intervention rate
- 2. Tougher action against horizontal mergers
- 2.1 Closeness of competition and important competitive force have become empty shells
- 2.2 Unclear treatment of “key” vs. “fringe” players
- 2.3 The decline of coordinated effects cases
- 2.4 SIEC test used as a “door opener” for questionable theories of harm
- 2.4.1 Innovation
- 2.4.2 Killer and “zombie” acquisitions
- 2.4.3 Portfolio dominance
- 2.4.4 Issues allegedly arising from common minority ownership
- 3. Tougher action against non-horizontal mergers
- 4. Burden of proof and efficiencies
- 5. The “S” in SIEC
- 6. Assumption of anti-competitiveness and broader skepticism of mergers
- V. Practical observations
- VI. Conclusions and outlook
- *
- *)Dr. iur., LL.M. (Amsterdam), Rechtsanwalt, DüsseldorfThe author thanks his colleagues D. Daniel Sokol, Douglas Jasinski, Thilo Wienke, Cristina Caroppo, Johannes Gehring and David Marder for their comments and help with some of the research.
Der Inhalt dieses Beitrags ist nicht frei verfügbar.
Für Abonnenten ist der Zugang zu Aufsätzen und Rechtsprechung frei.
Sollten Sie über kein Abonnement verfügen, können Sie den gewünschten Beitrag trotzdem kostenpflichtig erwerben:
Erwerben Sie den gewünschten Beitrag kostenpflichtig per Rechnung.
Erwerben Sie den gewünschten Beitrag kostenpflichtig mit PayPal.