Europe’s General Court has dismissed an appeal against the EC’s 2019 decision to prohibit Thyssenkrupp’s proposed joint venture with Tata Steel, ruling that the EC succeeded in proving there was a sufficient degree of probability of competition being harmed by the JV. However the case is on appeal to the Court of Justice of the EU, which will make a final determination regarding the legal standard.The EC claimed that the JV would not have resulted in the creation or the strengthening of a dominant position but would have led to a significant impediment to effective competition in a substantial part of the internal market, making it a gap case under the EU Merger Regulation.The last time the GC ruled on a gap case, in 2020, the legal standard implied was higher: with the GC indicating a strong probability, when demonstrating that there would be an SIEC, and sufficiently high degree of probability of price increases.
Europe’s General Court has dismissed an appeal against the EC’s 2019 decision to prohibit Thyssenkrupp’s proposed joint venture with Tata Steel, ruling that the EC succeeded in proving there was a sufficient degree of probability of competition being harmed by the JV. However the case is on appeal to the Court of Justice of the EU, which will make a final determination regarding the legal standard.The EC claimed that the JV would not have resulted in the creation or the strengthening of a dominant position but would have led to a significant impediment to effective competition in a substantial part of the internal market, making it a gap case under the EU Merger Regulation.The last time the GC ruled on a gap case, in 2020, the legal standard implied was higher: with the GC indicating a strong probability, when demonstrating that there would be an SIEC, and sufficiently high degree of probability of price increases.
