EU Files Additional Antitrust Charges Against Vivendi Over Lagardère Deal

According to Reuters, the Commission has delivered a supplementary Statement of Objections that introduces additional evidence supporting its existing case while largely maintaining the original scope of the alleged infringement.

The investigation centers on whether Vivendi violated the European Union’s merger control rules by effectively completing or exercising control over Lagardère before obtaining formal clearance from Brussels—a practice commonly referred to in competition law as “gun-jumping.” Under the EU Merger Regulation, companies involved in qualifying mergers must notify regulators and refrain from implementing transactions until approval has been granted.

The European Commission first informed Vivendi of its preliminary concerns in 2025, arguing that the company may have breached both notification and standstill obligations governing large mergers. Reuters reported that the latest filing supplements those earlier allegations with what Commission officials described as significant new evidence and explanatory material rather than expanding the underlying case.

If the Commission ultimately concludes that EU merger rules were violated, Vivendi could face a financial penalty of up to 10% of its worldwide annual revenue, one of the strongest enforcement tools available under European competition law. Reuters reported that the company retains the right to request an oral hearing before the Commission reaches a final decision.

The underlying acquisition itself has already received regulatory approval. In 2023, the Commission cleared Vivendi’s purchase of Lagardère after the company agreed to remedies designed to address competition concerns in publishing and media markets, including divestments intended to preserve competition.

Related: EU Court Rejects Vivendi Challenge Over Information Requests in Lagardère Probe

However, clearance of the merger did not end regulatory scrutiny. European competition authorities subsequently opened a separate investigation into whether Vivendi may have exercised influence over Lagardère before receiving formal authorization, making the current proceedings distinct from the Commission’s assessment of the merger’s competitive effects.

The case reflects the European Commission’s increasingly strict approach toward procedural violations in merger enforcement. While many competition investigations focus on whether a transaction reduces competition, gun-jumping cases instead examine whether companies complied with mandatory regulatory procedures designed to prevent businesses from coordinating or integrating operations before official approval.

The Commission has repeatedly emphasized that respecting notification and standstill requirements is essential to maintaining effective merger oversight across the European Union. Competition authorities have imposed substantial fines in previous gun-jumping cases involving major corporations, underscoring that procedural compliance is treated as a significant element of EU competition policy even when a transaction is ultimately approved.

The Commission’s broader investigative powers received additional judicial backing in June, when the EU General Court dismissed Vivendi’s challenge to requests for documents and communications gathered during the investigation. According to Reuters, the court upheld the Commission’s authority to obtain information relevant to merger investigations despite arguments concerning privacy rights and journalistic source protection.

The supplementary Statement of Objections does not represent a final finding of wrongdoing. Vivendi will have an opportunity to respond to the latest allegations and present its defense before the European Commission determines whether EU merger rules were breached and whether any financial sanctions should be imposed.

Source: Reuters