Apresentação
Este é um informativo diário que traz para o(a) leitor (a) notícias e casos de defesa da concorrência das principais jurisdições antitruste do mundo (CADE, FTC, Comissão Europeia, CMA etc).
Notícias
PAUTA DA 236ª SESSÃO ORDINÁRIA DE JULGAMENTO
A SER REALIZADA EM 25 DE SETEMBRO DE 2024
Dia: 25/09/2024
Hora: 10 horas
Nos termos do art. 60, parágrafo único c/c arts. 75, §1º e 76, §4º do Regimento Interno do Cade, e com fundamento no Despacho da Presidência nº 75/2024 (SEI 1445065 ), a Sessão de Julgamento será realizada por meio remoto, com transmissão em tempo real pelo sítio eletrônico www.cade.gov.br e pelo canal do Cade no Youtube (https://bit.ly/39SsiVg).
Eventual pedido de sustentação oral deverá ser formalizado pelo e-mail cgp@cade.gov.br ou pelo número de WhatsApp +55 (61) 99939-6256 até 24 horas antes do início da sessão virtual. No mesmo prazo o advogado deverá enviar o arquivo de mídia à Secretaria do Plenário, em conformidade com o art. 81, §§ 5º e 6º do Regimento Interno.
Com relação aos requerimentos de ordem, nos termos do art. 81, § 5º do Regimento Interno do Cade, fica garantido o acesso de advogado constituído nos autos, para participação ativa a qualquer momento, durante o julgamento. A solicitação deverá ser encaminhada à Secretaria do Plenário, pelo e-mail cgp@cade.gov.br ou pelo número de WhatsApp +55 (61) 99939-6256, que informará sobre o procedimento a ser adotado.
O advogado deverá se responsabilizar pela qualidade do arquivo de mídia encaminhado, bem como pela adequação do ambiente escolhido para participação na sessão em tempo real.
A sustentação oral ou o requerimento de ordem também poderão ser realizados por meio de equipamento eletrônico disponível nas instalações do Cade.
1. Ato de Concentração nº 08700.000711/2024-84
Requerentes: SMR Participações e Investimentos S.A e CIA Paraná de Alimentos S.A.
Advogados: Ademir Antonio Pereira Jr., Yan Villela Vieira, Bruna Luiza Prinet de Morais e outros.
Relator: Diogo Thomson de Andrade.
2. Ato de Concentração nº 08700.004023/2024-93
Requerentes: 3R Petroleum Offshore S.A. e Consórcio Papa-Terra.
Advogados: Maria Eugênia Novis, João Felipe Achcar de Azambuja e Vitor Scavone Damasio.
Relatora: Conselheira Camila Cabral Pires Alves.
3. Ato de concentração nº 08700.006814/2023-77
Requerentes: Minerva S.A., Marfrig Global Foods S.A e Marfrig Chile S.A.
Terceiro Interessado: Confederação da Agricultura e Pecuária do Brasil – CNA.
Advogados: Roberto Lincoln de Sousa Gomes Júnior, Luiz Augusto Azevedo de Almeida Hoffmann, Flavia Regina Ribeiro da Silva Villa, Alexandre de Aguiar Cezimbra, Gustavo Marioti Barros de Melo, Victor Santos Rufino, Victor Cavalcanti Couto e Victoria de Almeida Richa, Carlos Bastide Horbach, Carolina Carvalhais Vieira de Melo, e outros.
Relator: Conselheiro Carlos Jacques Vieira Gomes.
4. Apuração de Ato de Concentração nº 08700.002634/2022-35
Representante: Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica – ex-officio.
Representados: Biogénesis Bagó Saúde Animal Ltda e Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health do Brasil Ltda.
Advogados: Ivens Henrique Hübert, Paulo Leonardo Casagrande, Andrea da Cunha Cruz, Caroline Guyt França.
Relator: Diogo Thomson de Andrade.
5. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.001164/2018-14
Representante: Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica ex-officio.
Representados: Azevedo Bento S/A Comércio e Indústria, Refisa Indústria e Comércio Ltda, SPO Indústria e Comércio Ltda, Clóvis Heitor Castro; Cristiano Luiz Pereira, Darcy Carvalho da Silveira, Davi Alves de Lima, Edimar Henrique de Oliveira, Edson Geraldo da Silva Bento, Elisangela Alves de Lima Morais, Elislande Alves de Lima, Ênio Costa de Oliveira, Gabriel Teixeira Martinho, Gilberto Alves de Lima, Lauro Barata Soares de Figueiredo, Rafael Luiz Pereira, Sidinei de Souza Padilha, e Valdécio Alves de Lima.
Advogados: Joyce Honda, Daniel Victor da Silva Ferreira, Jamily Schlickmann, José Vlademir Meister, Cleverson Marinho Teixeira, Carlos Magalhães, George Filgueira, Marcelo Cama Proença Fernandes, Cristiane Sartori Gattiboni, Débora Gattiboni Lopes, Marcela Mattiuzzo e Ana Mallard Velloso, Felipe Fernandes Reis e outros.
Relator: Conselheiro Victor Oliveira Fernandes.
6. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.002124/2016-10
Representante: Associação Evangélica Beneficente Espírito Santense – AEBES.
Advogados: Renan Sales Vanderlei e Thiago Carvalho De Oliveira.
Representados: Federação Brasileira das Cooperativas de Especialidades Médicas (Febracem); Cooperativa de Anestesiologia do Estado do Espírito Santo (COOPANEST/ES); Cooperativa dos Médicos Intensivistas do Espírito Santo (Cooperati); Cooperativa dos Cirurgiões Plásticos do Estado do Espirito Santo (Cooplastes); Cooperativa dos Cirurgiões Gerais do Estado do Espírito Santo (Cooperciges); Cooperativa dos Cirurgiões Pediátricos do Estado do Espírito Santo (Coopercipes); Cooperativa dos Cirurgiões Cardiovasculares do Estado do Espírito Santo (Coopcardio); Cooperativa dos Neurocirurgiões do Estado do Espírito Santo (Coopneuro); Cooperativa de Ortopedistas e Traumatologistas do Espírito Santo (Cootes); Cooperativa dos Angiologistas e Cirurgiões Vasculares do Espírito Santo (Coopangio); Conselho Regional de Medicina do Espírito Santo (CRM-ES); Sociedade Brasileira de Neurocirurgia (SBN); Erick Freitas Curi; Paulo Roberto Paiva; Modesto Cerioni Junior e Clemente Augusto de Brito Pereira.
Advogados: Alexandre de Souza Machado, Eliomar Bufon Lube, Denise Chachamovitz Leao de Salles, Vitor Luis Pereira Jorge, Ricardo Barros Brum, Paulo Henrique Cunha da Silva, Wilson Knoner Campos, Fernando Godoi Wanderley, Pablo Luiz Rosa Oliveira, Magda Maria Barreto, Dianna Borges Rodrigues, Josiane Faustino Pianca, Denise Chachamovitz Leao de Salles, Vitor Luis Pereira Jorge, Ricardo Barros Brum, Luiz Telvio Valim, Rayanny Cristiny Bertholdo Soares, Winicios Damm Lourenco, Alexandre de Lacerda Rossoni, Claudia Ferreira Garcia, Dyego Penha Frasson, Renan Sales Vanderlei, Thiago Carvalho de Oliveira e outros.
Relator: Conselheiro Gustavo Augusto Freitas de Lima.
7. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.002160/2018-45
Representante: Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica ex-officio.
Representados: Sindicato dos Transportadores Autônomos de Contêineres e Cargas em Geral de Itajaí e Região (Sintracon/SC).
Advogados: Dalírio Anselmo da Silva e André Bona da Silva.
Relator: Víctor Oliveira Fernandes.
8. Processo Administrativo nº 08700.003826/2015-30
Representante: Ministério Público do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte.
Representados: Detalhe Serigrafia e Confecções; Francisco Flávio de Carvalho ME, “Infodigital”; F. N. dos Santos Neto – ME, “Ideal Artes Gráficas”; Gerusa Rodrigues de P. Oliveira ME, “Gerusa Confecções”; Gisnaude Gentil Fernandes de Souza – ME, “Gráfica Brasil”; João Batista Dantas Maia ME, “BM Gráfica”; L de L Alves ME, “Gráfica Luzia”; M. C. Batista dos Santos ME, “J L Gráfica”; M. X. Formiga Frota EPP, “Repet Design”; Ricardo Gomes da Silva ME, “RGS Impressos Gráficos”; Francisco Flávio de Carvalho; Francisco Nunes dos Santos Neto; Genildo Epifânio de Oliveira Júnior; Geruciano Rodrigues de Paiva Oliveira; Gisnaude Gentil Fernandes de Sousa; Herlandson de Oliveira Fernandes; João Batista Dantas Maia; Luzinelson de Lima Alves; Maria Consuelo Batista dos Santos; Michelson Ximenes Formiga Frota e Ricardo Gomes da Silva.
Advogados: Adriano Gentil de Lima, Diego Meira de Souza, Francisco Raniere Batista de Araújo, Gilton Batista de Araújo Filho, Isaac Samuel do Carmo, Leylane Cristina Barros Pereira, Mariana Rosado de Miranda, Ravardierison Cardoso de Noronha e Reovan Brito Cabral da Nóbrega.
Relator: José Levi Mello do Amaral Júnior.
Alexandre Cordeiro Macedo
Presidente do Conselho
Justice Department Withdraws from 1995 Bank Merger Guidelines
The Justice Department announced today its withdrawal from the 1995 Bank Merger Guidelines and emphasized that the 2023 Merger Guidelines remain its sole and authoritative statement across all industries.
September 17, 2024
FTC Statement Regarding WillScot’s Decision to Abandon Proposed $3.8 Billion Acquisition of Competitor McGrath RentCorp
Tags:
Phoenix, Arizona-based WillScot Holdings Corporation (WillScot) today announced that it is abandoning its proposed acquisition of McGrath RentCorp (McGrath). Under the merger agreement, which the companies publicly disclosed on January 29, 2024, WillScot agreed to acquire McGrath, a leading business-to-business rental company based in Livermore, California, for $3.8 billion. WillScot and McGrath are two of the largest modular and portable storage rental companies nationally and in many local markets throughout the United States.
On February 22, 2024, McGrath announced that both it and WillScot had received second requests for additional information from the FTC in connection with the agency’s review of the proposed acquisition.
In response to WillScot’s decision to abandon the merger, FTC Bureau of Competition Director Henry Liu issued the following statement:
“Strong competition in the markets for modular and portable storage solutions is essential to ensuring low prices and high levels of product quality and customer service for businesses and school districts nationwide. The FTC is pleased that WillScot has announced that it is terminating its proposed deal to acquire McGrath RentCorp in the face of a potential Commission challenge. FTC staff worked tirelessly to investigate the potential impacts of the proposed acquisition and found that customers in the construction, retail, education, and many other industries will benefit from continued competition between these two companies in markets across the country.”
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition, and protect and educate consumers. The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. You can learn more about how competition benefits consumers or file an antitrust complaint. For the latest news and resources, follow the FTC on social media, subscribe to press releases and read our blog.
Contact Information
Media Contact
Office of Public Affairs
GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen to Pay Nearly $1 Million Penalty to Settle Antitrust Law Violation
Tags:
Today, the Federal Trade Commission announced that Ryan Cohen, managing partner of RC Ventures, LLC, and Chairman and CEO of GameStop Corp., will pay a $985,320 civil penalty to settle charges that his acquisition of Wells Fargo & Company (Wells Fargo) shares violated the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act.
According to the complaint, Cohen, who is also the founder and former CEO of Chewy, Inc., acquired more than 562,000 Wells Fargo voting securities resulting in aggregated holdings of Wells Fargo securities that exceeded HSR filing thresholds. Cohen’s purchase triggered an obligation to file an HSR form with federal antitrust agencies and wait before completing the acquisition. Yet Cohen failed to do so, which violated the HSR Act, according to the complaint.
The HSR Act requires companies and individuals to report large transactions, including securities acquisitions, over a certain threshold to the FTC and DOJ so that the federal agencies can investigate the deals before they close. The agencies have 30 days after a transaction has been reported to conduct an initial investigation and file a “second request” demand for additional information. It is generally illegal to finalize an acquisition during this investigatory period. The maximum civil penalty for an HSR violation at the time Cohen made the corrective filing was currently $43,792 per day.
According to the complaint, Cohen’s acquisition of Wells Fargo voting securities was not exempt under the Investment-Only Exemption of the HSR Act, even though his holding represented less than 10 percent of the outstanding voting securities of Wells Fargo.
When acquiring the Wells Fargo shares Cohen intended to influence Wells Fargo’s business decisions as evidenced by Cohen’s emails when he advocated for a board seat. After acquiring the shares, Cohen proceeded to have periodic communications with Wells Fargo’s leadership regarding suggestions to improve Wells Fargo’s business and to advocate for a potential board seat, according to the complaint.
The Commission vote to accept the settlement and refer the matter to the Department of Justice for filing was 5-0. The Department of Justice filed the complaint and proposed stipulated order on the FTC’s behalf in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
As required by the Tunney Act, the proposed settlement, along with a competitive impact statement, will be published in the Federal Register. Any person may submit written comments concerning the proposed settlement during a 60-day comment period to Maribeth Petrizzi, Special Attorney, United States, c/o Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20580 bccompliance@ftc.gov. At the conclusion of the 60-day comment period, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia may approve the proposed settlement upon finding that it is in the public interest.
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition, and protect and educate consumers. The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. You can learn more about how competition benefits consumers or file an antitrust complaint. For the latest news and resources, follow the FTC on social media, subscribe to press releases and read our blog.
Contact Information
Media Contacts
Office of Public Affairs
Office of Public Affairs
Commission takes note of the withdrawal of referral requests by Member States concerning the acquisition of certain assets of Inflection by Microsoft
Page contents
The European Commission takes note of the withdrawal of the initial referral requests by seven Member States to review under Article 22 of the EU Merger Regulation (‘EUMR’) the acquisition of certain assets of Inflection AI, Inc. (‘Inflection’) by Microsoft Corporation (‘Microsoft). The deadline for the Commission to decide upon these requests was 19 September 2024. Following the judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union of 3 September 2024 in the Illumina/GRAIL case, holding that Member States cannot refer a transaction to the Commission under Article 22 of the EUMR when not competent to review the transaction under their national merger control rules, all seven Member States that submitted an initial referral have decided to withdraw their requests. Therefore, the Commission will take no decision in this matter.
Microsoft, a global technology company headquartered in the US, offers a wide range of products and services to customers including, among others, an AI chatbot called Microsoft Copilot, a cloud computing platform called Azure, a PC operating system known under the name of Microsoft Windows, and productivity services called Microsoft 365. Inflection, headquartered in the US, is a technology company that, until the transaction, developed a machine learning and generative AI foundation model and an AI chatbot called Pi.
The transaction and the referral procedure
On 19 March 2024, Microsoft announced the hiring of the two co-founders of Inflection, assigned with the task of advancing Copilot and other consumer artificial intelligence products and research at Microsoft. In addition to the hiring of these two co-founders, Microsoft made employment offers to most of Inflection’s staff and agreed, amongst others, on a non-exclusive license for Inflection’s intellectual property and, according to reports, on a waiver of any legal rights by Inflection for hiring the latter’s staff.
Upon review of the details of the transaction and its implementation, based on information provided to the Commission by Microsoft and Inflection, the Commission considers that the transaction involves all assets necessary to transfer Inflection’s position in the markets for generative AI foundation models and for AI chatbots to Microsoft. Further, in view of Inflection’s announcement on 19 March 2024 that the ‘new Inflection’ would shift its focus to a different activity, namely its AI studio business, the Commission regards the agreements entered into between Microsoft and Inflection as a structural change in the market that amounts to a concentration as defined under Article 3 of the EUMR.
The transaction did not reach the notification thresholds set out in Article 1 of the EUMR and was also not notified in any Member State. Based on information requested from Microsoft and Inflection, in July 2024 the Commission considered that the concentration satisfies all criteria for a referral under Article 22 of the EUMR. This provision allows Member States to request the Commission to examine a merger that does not have an EU dimension but affects trade within the Single Market and threatens to significantly affect competition within the territory of the Member States making the request.
Consequently, the Commission sent a letter pursuant to Article 22(5) of the EUMR inviting Member States to refer the transaction to it for review.
In response to this letter, seven Member States submitted a referral request pursuant to Article 22(1) of the EUMR, explaining that, in their view, the transaction amounted to a concentration which satisfies the criteria for a referral pursuant to Article 22 of the EUMR. Other Member States and countries of the European Economic Area were invited to join the requests. Following the Court of Justice’s judgment in the Illumina/GRAIL case, all Member States have chosen to withdraw their referral requests or request to join these referrals, resulting in the end of this procedure.
The Commission will continue to work together with Member States and the parties to concentrations to assess whether their transactions will be reviewed under national merger control regimes or referred to the Commission in line with the legal requirements for such referrals as clarified in the recent Illumina/GRAIL judgment of the Court of Justice.
Related topics
Print friendly pdf
Merger
English
38.124, kB – PDF
Avocats au Conseil d’État et à la Cour de Cassation – L’Autorité de la concurrence lance une consultation publique
Publié le 19 septembre 2024
L’Autorité lance aujourd’hui la procédure prévue à l’article L. 462-4-2 du Code de commerce en vue d’élaborer un nouvel avis sur la liberté d’installation des avocats au Conseil d’État et à la Cour de cassation et réviser ses recommandations en matière de création d’offices.
L’Autorité de la concurrence encourage les collaborateurs des avocats aux Conseils ainsi que les étudiants en cours de formation à l’IFRAC à répondre à la présente consultation.
Afin de contribuer à l’avis de l’Autorité et aux recommandations qui y seront associées, les acteurs concernés sont invités à répondre au questionnaire accessible en ligne en cliquant sur le lien ci-dessous avant le 19 octobre 2024.
Communiqué de presse du 19 septembre
Avocats au Conseil d’État et à la Cour de Cassation – L’Autorité de la concurrence lance une consultation publique en vue de préparer un nouvel avis relatif à la liberté d’installation de ces professionnels
AdC adotou uma decisão de não oposição na operação de concentração 54/2024 – ON Tower Portugal / NOS Technology.
Em 18 de setembro de 2024, o Conselho de Administração da Autoridade da Concorrência, no uso da competência que lhe é conferida pela alínea d) do n.º 1 do artigo 19.º dos Estatutos, aprovados pelo Decreto-Lei n.º 125/2014, de 18 de agosto, delibera adotar uma decisão de não oposição à operação de concentração, nos termos da alínea b) do n.º 1 do artigo 50.º da Lei da Concorrência, uma vez que a mesma não é suscetível de criar entraves significativos à concorrência efetiva no mercado nacional ou numa parte substancial deste.
Ficha do processo
AdC adotou uma decisão de não oposição na operação de concentração 55/2024 – Alliance Healthcare / Alloga Logifarma.
Em 18 de setembro de 2024, o Conselho de Administração da Autoridade da Concorrência, no uso da competência que lhe é conferida pela alínea d) do n.º 1 do artigo 19.º dos Estatutos, aprovados pelo Decreto-Lei n.º 125/2014, de 18 de agosto, delibera adotar uma decisão de não oposição à operação de concentração, nos termos da alínea b) do n.º 1 do artigo 50.º da Lei da Concorrência, uma vez que a mesma não é suscetível de criar entraves significativos à concorrência efetiva no mercado nacional ou numa parte substancial deste.
Ficha do processo
Atos de concentração – Decisões
CMA
Arla Foods Ingredients / Volac Whey Nutrition merger inquiry
- The CMA is investigating the anticipated acquisition by Arla Foods Ingredients Group P/S of Volac Whey Nutrition Holdings Limited.
- Updated: 18 September 2024
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company / Juniper Networks, Inc. merger inquiry
- The CMA investigated and cleared the anticipated acquisition by Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company of Juniper Networks, Inc.
- Updated: 17 September 2024
Lindab / HAS-Vent merger inquiry
- The CMA is investigating the completed acquisition by Lindab International AB of HAS-Vent Holdings Limited.
- Updated: 17 September 2024
CNMC
Competencia
Concentraciones – Adquisición control exclusivo
C/1494/24 – MUTUA MADRILEÑA / ANJANA
Resolución del Consejo – Autorización en 1ª fase | 18 Sep 2024