Beumer Challenges EU Decision on Vanderlande-Siemens Merger Review

According to a Reuters report by Foo Yun Chee, Beumer has asked the EU General Court in Luxembourg to overturn the Commission’s decision not to assume jurisdiction over the transaction. The company argues that EU regulators should have examined the acquisition because national competition authorities lacked the necessary powers to effectively review or potentially unwind the completed deal.

The dispute stems from Siemens’ approximately €300 million sale of its airport logistics unit to Vanderlande, a Netherlands-based supplier of baggage handling and parcel-sorting systems owned by Japan’s Toyota Industries. The transaction was announced two years ago and drew objections from Beumer, which competes in airport baggage handling and logistics automation markets.

Disagreement over regulatory jurisdiction

Reuters reported that regulators in Portugal and Spain sought clearance of the transaction earlier this year before, together with Italy, requesting that the European Commission take over the case. However, the Commission rejected those referral requests in May, stating that EU-level intervention was not appropriate because the acquisition had already been completed for more than a year. It instead maintained that the national competition authorities should continue examining the matter.

In its court filing, Beumer contends that the Commission misapplied EU merger rules by declining the referral. The company argues that when requesting national competition authorities are not in a position to conduct an effective review, the Commission should not have discretion to refuse jurisdiction. Reuters reported that Beumer also maintains that national regulators generally lack authority to reverse an already completed merger, making Commission intervention necessary in this instance.

The European Commission has defended its position. A Commission spokesperson said the institution is prepared to defend its decision before the court, according to Reuters.

Competition policy implications

The case highlights ongoing debates over the allocation of merger review responsibilities between national competition authorities and the European Commission under the EU’s competition framework. While the Commission typically reviews transactions meeting EU turnover thresholds, national authorities can request that Brussels examine deals they believe may significantly affect competition across multiple member states.

The dispute also underscores broader concerns surrounding so-called “below-threshold” acquisitions—transactions that may not automatically require EU merger notification but can still attract regulatory attention if they are viewed as capable of reducing competition in specialized markets. European competition authorities have increasingly explored mechanisms to scrutinize such transactions when conventional notification thresholds are not met.

In industries such as airport baggage handling, parcel sorting and logistics automation, market participants have argued that consolidation among a limited number of major suppliers can influence competition for infrastructure projects, technology development and long-term service contracts.

Source: Reuters