The Legal Treatment of Minority Shareholdings Under EU Competition Law: Present and Future
Posted by Social Science Research Network
The Legal Treatment of Minority Shareholdings Under EU Competition Law: Present and Future ANNA TZANAKI (University College London)
Abstract: The debate on the regulation of minority shareholdings as a type of “structural link” between competing undertakings is not a new one in the sphere of EU competition law. As a matter of policy, the incomplete and rather divisive treatment of minority shareholdings under the current EU merger control and antitrust rules is considered problematic. This is all the more true since this division is not based on sound economic grounds. Indeed, there are EU and non-EU jurisdictions that approach the problem of the competition law treatment of minority shareholdings rather differently for all good reasons. The need and desirability, however, to go beyond the existing status quo in the EU and ingrain innovation into the law is often challenged, either due to a theoretical opposition to the existence of a significant gap authorising regulatory intervention or due to fears of any change being overbroad and thus potentially doing more harm than good.
This paper provides an overview of the theories of harm and the potential anticompetitive nature of minority share ownership (Part II); analyses the existing EU competition law framework as it applies to minority shareholdings and outlines the extent of the gap in the law (Part III); draws a parallel with regulatory regimes dealing with this problem in other major jurisdictions (Part IV); presents the reform proposals put forward by the Commission and the progressive change of heart in terms of EU competition policy (Part V); and finally it concludes with some remarks as to the future outlook and possible challenges in addressing the legal gap (Part VI).
Featured News
Massachusetts AG Sues Insulin Makers and PBMs Over Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Apple and Amazon Avoid Mass Lawsuit in UK Over Alleged Collusion
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Top Agent Network Drops Antitrust Suit Against National Association of Realtors
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Weil, Gotshal & Manges Strengthens Antitrust Practice with New Partner
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Russian Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Google for Non-Compliance with Content Removal Orders
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand