Rachel Brandenburger, Thomas Janssens, Apr 19, 2007
In its Impala judgment last year, the Court of First Instance annulled a European Commission unconditional merger clearance decision for the first time. As a result, the Commission is having to carry out a new investigation into a transaction that closed over two years ago. In this judgment, the Court applied the three-limbed test for collective dominance from Airtours judgment. But this time it assessed strengthening, as opposed to creation, of collective dominance. Importantly, the Court made it clear that the Commission must base a clearance on equally solid grounds as a prohibition. We examine a number of the fundamental issues that the Impala judgment has raised. These have significance beyond the factual context of the case itself, both for the way the Commission must conduct its investigations and for the role of judicial review by the EC courts. We conclude by suggesting some changes in Court and Commission practices that would, we believe, strengthen the effectiveness of EC merger control.
Featured News
Croatia Competition Authority Approves HPB Acquisition of Croatia Banka
Jul 19, 2026 by
CPI
Democratic Lawmakers Urge DOJ to Closely Examine Fox-Roku Merger
Jul 19, 2026 by
CPI
US Judge Clears Path for Broad Beef Antitrust Class Actions Against Major Meatpackers
Jul 19, 2026 by
CPI
India’s Competition Regulator Dismisses Antitrust Complaint Against Reliance Jio and 4,500 Firms
Jul 19, 2026 by
CPI
Apple Opens Early Settlement Discussions With DOJ
Jul 17, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Agentic AI & Antitrust
Jul 16, 2026 by
CPI
AI Agents and Collusion: The Two Faces of Agentic AI
Jul 16, 2026 by
Giovanna Massarotto
Agentic AI’s Regulatory Conundrum
Jul 16, 2026 by
Anant Raut
Inter-AI-Agent Competition
Jul 16, 2026 by
Stefan Thomas
Navigating the Increasing Regulatory Scrutiny of AI-Pricing Tools: Competition and Other Emerging Risks
Jul 16, 2026 by
Mark Krotoski & Vinny Sidhu