Notícias
Publicada pauta da sessão de julgamento da próxima quarta-feira (17/04). Confira!
Cinco casos serão apreciados durante a 228ª reunião do Tribunal Administrativo
Publicado em 11/04/2024 10h00 Atualizado em 11/04/2024 18h21
Foi publicada, no Diário Oficial da União desta quinta-feira (11/04), a pauta da 228ª Sessão Ordinária de Julgamento do Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (Cade), que acontecerá na próxima quarta-feira (17/04), às 10h, com transmissão pelo YouTube da autarquia.
Ao total, cinco casos serão apreciados, sendo um ato de concentração, dois procedimentos administrativos para apuração de ato de concentração e dois processos administrativos.
Confira a pauta de julgamento:
1. Ato de Concentração nº 08700.003198/2023-01
Requerentes: Knauf do Brasil Ltda. e Trevo Industrial de Acartonados S.A..
Relator: conselheiro Victor Oliveira Fernandes
2. Procedimento Administrativo de Apuração de Ato de Concentração nº 08700.005463/2019-09
Representadas: Govesa Motors Veículos, Peças e Serviços Ltda., Kuruma Veículos S.A., Moitinho Automóveis Ltda.
Relator: conselheiro Gustavo Augusto
3. Procedimento Administrativo de Apuração de Ato de Concentração nº 08700.001524/2023-37
Representadas: Illian Energias Renováveis S.A., Solar Irecê S.A. e Solar Irecê 3 S.A.
Relator: conselheiro Diogo Thomson
4. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.007776/2016-41
Representante: Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica ex officio.
Representados: Andrade Gutierrez Engenharia S.A. (atual denominação social de Construtora Andrade Gutierrez S.A.), Construções e Comércio Camargo Corrêa S.A., EIT – Empresa Industrial e Técnica S.A., Camter Construções e Empreendimentos S.A., Construtora Norberto Odebrecht S.A., Delta Construções S.A., Construtora OAS S.A., Álya Construtora S.A. (atual denominação social de Construtora Queiroz Galvão S.A.), Carioca Christiani-Nielsen Engenharia S.A., Caenge S.A. Construção, Administração e Engenharia, em recuperação judicial; e pessoas físicas.
Relator: conselheiro Sérgio Ravagnani
Voto-Vista: presidente Alexandre Cordeiro
5. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.003266/2022-42
Representante: Grid Pneus e Serviços Automotivos Ltda.
Representados: Fabio Siricio, Orivaldo Sandes Basso, Sergio Pimenta, Arilton da Silva Machado, Marcelo Augusto Borges, Sérgio Carlos Ferreira, Clodoaldo Jose Barbosa, Nilberto Antônio Bellenzier, João Alberto Pinho de Camargo, Rodrigo Duarte Abud, Rogério Magalhães Gustavo de Souza e pessoas jurídicas.
Relator: conselheiro Gustavo Augusto
Justice Department’s Procurement Collusion Strike Force Announces Four New National Law Enforcement Partners
Friday, April 12, 2024Share
For Immediate Release
Office of Public Affairs
The Justice Department announced today that the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (PCSF) is adding four new national partners for a total of 38 agencies and offices committed to deterring, detecting, investigating and prosecuting antitrust crimes and related schemes that target government procurement, grants and program funding at all levels of government.
The new partners include three U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in districts with diverse government spending oversight priorities and proven PCSF and Antitrust Division relationships:
- U.S. Attorney S. Lane Tucker for the District of Alaska
- U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans for the Eastern District of Louisiana
- U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger for the District of New Jersey
The PCSF is also welcoming the Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General (OIG), whose oversight of billions of dollars authorized under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act of 2022 closely aligns with PCSF priorities.
“Since 2019, the Procurement Collusion Strike Force has aggressively investigated and prosecuted crimes that undermine and distort the competitive process in taxpayer-funded procurements,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “With new investments in infrastructure, energy and hi-tech manufacturing the PCSF’ strategic expansion to include these four partners positions it to accomplish its important mandate more effectively.”
“Billions in federal funds are coming into our state to improve the lives of Alaskans, making it imperative that those tax dollars are used for their intended purpose and not illegally obtained,” said U.S. Attorney S. Lane Tucker for the District of Alaska. “The implementation of the Procurement Collusion Strike Force in Alaska showcases my office’s commitment to take action against collusive conduct and related fraudulent schemes by individuals or corporations that threaten government spending destined to progress our great state.”
“We welcome the new partnership and expertise that the PCSF brings to our district,” said U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans for the Eastern District of Louisiana. “Our office now has access to an important force multiplier, the investigatory strength and institutional knowledge of 37 fellow agencies and offices dedicated to enforcing antitrust laws and protecting the integrity of our government procurement programs. Indeed, it will become a formidable partnership laser-focused on deterring and prosecuting procurement fraud.”
“A level playing field and fair competition are vitally important to ensure that taxpayers are getting the best value for their money when government contacts are awarded,” said U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger for the District of New Jersey. “My office is proud to join this national effort to combat price-fixing, bid rigging, and any type of collusion or fraud in government procurement. Working with our investigative partners, we will hold accountable anyone who tries to corrupt the procurement process.”
“Preventing, detecting and defeating criminal activity related to federal procurement and grant programs is a high priority for Commerce OIG,” said Acting Inspector General Roderick Anderson of the Department of Commerce. “We are pleased to join this strike force and look forward to collaborating with our partners to enhance our collective efforts to combat antitrust violations, ensure integrity within government procurements and spending and maximize value for taxpayers.”
In November 2019, the Justice Department created the PCSF, a joint law enforcement effort to combat antitrust crimes and related fraudulent schemes that impact government procurement, grant and program funding at all levels of government – federal, state and local. For more information, visit www.justice.gov/procurement-collusion-strike-force.
Updated April 12, 2024
Commission approves Illumina’s plan to unwind its completed acquisition of GRAIL
Page contents
Today, the European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation (‘EUMR’), Illumina‘s plan to divest GRAIL following the restorative measures requiring Illumina to unwind its completed acquisition of GRAIL, which the Commission adopted in October 2023.
In September 2022, the Commission prohibited the acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina over concerns that it would have stifled innovation and reduced choice in the emerging market for blood-based early cancer detection tests. Illumina and GRAIL unlawfully completed the merger during the Commission’s in-depth investigation, in breach of EU merger control rules. In July 2023, the Commission fined both companies for this infringement. In October 2023, it adopted restorative measures requiring Illumina to divest GRAIL in order to restore the competitive situation prevailing before the completion of the transaction. The restorative measures required Illumina to submit a divestment plan for the disposal of GRAIL to the Commission for approval.
The decision approving the divestment plan
With today’s decision, the Commission has approved the divestment plan submitted by Illumina for the disposal of GRAIL. In line with the restorative measures, the divestment plan foresees that Illumina can select the appropriate divestment method (either via a trade sale or a capital markets transaction). The Commission found that the plan, including the optionality between different divestment methods, met all the conditions set out in its decision imposing restorative measures on Illumina and GRAIL. In particular:
- GRAIL’s independence from Illumina would be restored to the same level enjoyed by GRAIL prior to the acquisition. Restoring GRAIL’s independence will remove the possible harm to competition resulting from Illumina’s ability and incentive to delay or disadvantage GRAIL’s rivals.
- The divestment plan ensures that GRAIL will be able to continue to operate as a viable and competitive business after the divestment as it was before Illumina’s acquisition. This will ensure that the innovation race between GRAIL and its rivals can continue in conditions similar to those in place before the transaction.
- The divestment options set out in the divestment plan are capable of being exercised in a timely manner, within strict deadlines and with sufficient certainty, so that the pre-transaction situation can be promptly restored.
Therefore, the Commission decided to approve Illumina’s divestment plan.
The divestment plan does not affect the transitional measures that Illumina and GRAIL need to comply with until Illumina has dissolved the transaction, as ordered by the Commission in its decision of October 2023, and confirms their applicability until the disposal is finalised. Such measures will ensure that Illumina and GRAIL continue to be held separate until the transaction is completely unwound in order to prevent further integration of GRAIL into Illumina’s business and subsequently irreparable harm to competition.
Companies and products
Illumina, headquartered in the US, is a global genomics company, which develops, manufactures and commercialises next generation sequencing (‘NGS’) systems, including sequencing instruments, consumables and related services. Illumina’s NGS systems are medical devices used in a variety of applications, including by customers in the oncology space that develop and run blood-based tests that can detect cancer or select appropriate therapies for cancer patients.
GRAIL, also headquartered in the US, is a healthcare company developing blood-based cancer tests based on genomic sequencing and data science tools. GRAIL’s flagship product is “Galleri”, an early multi-cancer detection test, whose purpose is to detect cancers in asymptomatic patients from a blood sample. In April 2021, GRAIL initiated a limited commercialisation of Galleri in the US. GRAIL has two additional pipeline products: (i) a diagnostic aid for cancer testing used to confirm a diagnosis of cancer in symptomatic patients, and (ii) a minimal residual disease test, to detect potential relapse in patients after cancer treatments. GRAIL was founded by Illumina in 2016, and was spun off later in the same year.
Background
The Illumina/GRAIL merger case
Following a referral request from six Member States, on 19 April 2021 the Commission accepted to review the proposed acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina and opened an in-depth investigation on 22 July 2021. On 13 July 2022, the General Court confirmed the Commission’s jurisdiction to review the transaction.
While the Commission’s in-depth investigation was still ongoing, Illumina publicly announced that it had completed its acquisition of GRAIL. As a result, on 29 October 2021, the Commission adopted interim measures to ensure that Illumina and GRAIL would remain separate pending the outcome of the Commission’s merger investigation.
On 6 September 2022, the Commission prohibited the implemented acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina over concerns that the merger would have stifled innovation and reduced choice in the emerging market for blood-based early cancer detection tests. Following the prohibition decision, the Commission renewed and adjusted the interim measures on 28 October 2022.
On 5 December 2022, the Commission sent a Statement of Objections to Illumina and GRAIL outlining the restorative measures it intended to adopt.
Furthermore, on 12 July 2023, the Commission fined Illumina and GRAIL €432 million and €1,000 respectively, for implementing their proposed merger before approval by the Commission, in breach of EU merger control rules.
Finally, on 12 October 2023 the Commission adopted restorative measures that order i) Illumina to divest GRAIL and restore the situation prevailing before the completion of the acquisition, and (ii)transitional measures that Illumina and GRAIL need to comply with until Illumina has dissolved the transaction.
Procedural background
The obligation not to implement a notifiable transaction either before its notification or before it has been declared compatible with the common market is laid down in Article 7(1) of the EU Merger Regulation. This standstill obligation prevents potentially irreparable negative impact of transactions on the market, as well as possible irreversible integration of merging parties, pending the outcome of the Commission’s merger investigations.
Compliance with the standstill obligation is essential for legal certainty, enables the Commission to conduct a correct analysis of the impact of mergers in the market and prevents the potentially detrimental impact of transactions on the competitive structure of the market. In this way, market forces work for the benefit of consumers. In cases where the standstill obligation has not been respected, and the Commission subsequently decides to prohibit the merger, it is necessary to adopt measures restore the situation pre-transaction.
Article 8(4)(a) of the EU Merger Regulation authorises the Commission to take appropriate restorative measures to restore the situation prevailing prior to the implementation of the concentration where the Commission finds that a concentration has already been implemented and that concentration has been declared incompatible with the internal market.
In case of non-compliance with the restorative measures, the Commission can impose periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of the average daily aggregate turnover of the company under Article 15 EUMR. Moreover, companies failing to comply with the restorative measures can be fined up to 10% of their annual worldwide turnover under Article 14 of the EU Merger Regulation.
More information will be available on the Commission’s competition website, in the Commission’s public register under the case number M.10939.
Secretary of State calls for Competition and Markets Authority to review competition in the home heating market
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero has asked the CMA to consider carrying out a review of the home heating appliance market.
From: Competition and Markets Authority
Published 15 April 2024
Get emails about this page
Documents
Letter from The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero
PDF, 125 KB, 2 pages
Letter from Sarah Cardell to The Rt Hon. Claire Coutinho MP
PDF, 140 KB, 2 pages
Details
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero wrote to the CMA in March 2024 asking it to consider carrying out a review of competition in the home heating market. The CMA has acknowledged the Secretary of State’s concerns and has committed to considering this work in the second half of 2024, consistent with its Annual Plan 2024 to 2025 medium term priority to take action to help accelerate the UK’s transition to a net zero economy.
Published 15 April 2024
Mergers orders and undertakings register
Register of orders and undertakings that are currently in force, have lapsed and have been released.
From:Competition and Markets Authority
Published 31 March 2014Last updated15
April 2024 — See all updatesGet emails about this page
Documents
Explanatory note
PDF, 123 KB, 3 pages
Enterprise Act 2002 merger remedies in force
HTML
Enterprise Act 2002 merger remedies: lapsed, released and interim measures
HTML
Fair Trading Act 1973 merger undertakings in force
HTML
Fair Trading Act 1973 merger undertakings: lapsed and released
HTML
Details
The register provides details of orders and undertakings under the market investigation and mergers provisions of the Enterprise Act 2002 (EA02).
It also provides details of orders and undertakings under the monopoly and merger provisions of the Fair Trading Act 1973 (FTA73).
The register is arranged into the following sections:
- EA02 merger remedies in force
- EA02 merger remedies: lapsed, released and interim measures
- FTA73 merger undertakings in force
- FTA73 merger undertakings: lapsed and released
Published 31 March 2014
Last updated 15 April 2024 + show all updates
Competition law warning and advisory letters register
A record of the warning and advisory letters about competition law issues sent by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).
From: Competition and Markets Authority
Published 14 January 2016
Last updated15 April 2024 —
See all updates Get emails about this page
Documents
Warning letters issued by the CMA
HTML
Advisory letters issued by the CMA
HTML
Details
The CMA uses warning and advisory letters to follow up businesses if we have concerns about possible law breaking and promote compliance with competition law.
This register gives details about warning and advisory letters that the CMA has sent to businesses.
Information for businesses about when the CMA may decide to send a warning or advisory letter and what to do if you receive one.
Published 14 January 2016
Last updated 15 April 2024 + show all update
L’Autorité publie un avis concernant les réserves interprofessionnelles dans le secteur des vins
Publié le 15 avril 2024
Réserves interprofessionnelles dans le secteur des vins : l’Autorité de la concurrence considère que les interprofessions peuvent prévoir un principe de tunnel de prix à condition toutefois que les bornes minimales et maximales du prix soient déterminées librement par chaque opérateur contractant
L’Autorité de la concurrence a été saisie pour avis par le ministre de l’économie, des finances et de la souveraineté industrielle et numérique sur la mise en place, par les interprofessions vitivinicoles, d’un encadrement du prix des réserves interprofessionnelles.
Alors que les interprofessions vitivinicoles peuvent mettre en place des mesures de régulation du marché comme la mise en réserve d’une partie des récoltes, ces dernières souhaitent également encadrer, à leur niveau collectif, le prix de la réserve lors de la libération de celle-ci, afin notamment d’éviter une fluctuation trop importante entre le prix du volume principal et celui du volume mis en réserve.
L’Autorité considère que, même si le secteur agricole bénéficie de certaines règles dérogatoires au droit de la concurrence, la mesure d’encadrement du prix des réserves interprofessionnelles envisagée ne rentre pas dans ces dérogations et, mise en œuvre par un organisme collectif qui fixerait de manière uniforme pour tous les opérateurs le taux de fluctuation des prix, elle est susceptible de constituer une entente sur les prix contraire au droit de la concurrence.
L’Autorité précise toutefois que les interprofessions peuvent insérer dans leur accord interprofessionnel, un « tunnel de prix », à savoir une disposition permettant aux opérateurs de prévoir dans leurs contrats des bornes minimales ou maximales entre lesquelles le prix de la réserve pourrait fluctuer. Mais ces bornes doivent être librement déterminées et convenues par chaque opérateur contractant, à l’exclusion de toute fixation en commun, et ainsi, sans que l’interprofession intervienne pour en déterminer le niveau.
En outre conformément aux dispositions de la loi EGAlim 2, l’Autorité relève que le Gouvernement pourrait aussi, par décret, imposer aux parties de prévoir dans leurs contrats une clause-type prévoyant un tunnel de prix, les bornes de celui-ci étant toujours librement fixées par les parties.
COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE DU 15 AVRIL 2024
Réserves interprofessionnelles dans le secteur des vins : l’Autorité de la concurrence considère que les interprofessions peuvent prévoir un principe de tunnel de prix à condition toutefois que les bornes minimales et maximales du prix soient déterminées librement par chaque opérateur contractant
Decisões
CADE
Ato de Concentração nº 08700.002036/2024-28
Requerentes: Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board, Nordic Capital e Advanz Pharma. Advogados: Marcio Soares e Mariana Hiromi Sonoda. Decido pela aprovação sem restrições.
Ato de Concentração nº 08700.001956/2024-29
Requerentes: ICI Holding SE, Evonik Superabsorber GmbH e Evonik Superabsorber LLC. Advogados: Renata Zuccolo, Ana Carolina Bittar e Pedro Anitelle. Decido pela aprovação sem restrições.
Ato de Concentração nº 08700.002132/2024-76
Requerentes: Cogne Acciali Speciali S.p.A. e Mannesmann Stainless Tubes GmbH. Advogados: Guilherme Ribas, Renata Arcoverde e Nicholas Cozman. Decido pela aprovação sem restrições.
Ato de Concentração nº 08700.002070/2024-01
Requerentes: Modena Intermediate LLC, A.W.S. Holding LLC e AirWatch Technology LLC. Advogados: Cristianne Saccab Zarzur, Jackson Ferreira, Daniel Williams, Michelle Marques Machado e Renata Caied. Decido pela aprovação sem restrições.
Ingressos
CADE
Ato de concentração nº 08700.002307/2024-45
Plano Capivari Empreendimentos Imobiliários Ltda.
Tencasa Investimentos Imobiliários Ltda.
Edital: 15.04.2024
Ato de concentração nº 08700.002264/2024-06
VEOLIA SERVIÇOS AMBIENTAIS BRASIL LTDA.
RAC SANEAMENTO LTDA
Edital: 15.04.2024