Competition Law Bulletin - Zhong Lun Competition Law Bulletin_August. 2016_En.pdfCompetition Law...

Competition Law Bulletin

August 2016 | Issue 15

Prepared by

Zhong Lun Antitrust Practice Group

Contact us

31/33/36/37 F, SK Tower, 6A Jianguomenwai Avenue, Chaoyang District

Beijing 100022, P.R. China

Tel: + (8610) 59572288

Fax: + (8610) 65681022

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://www.zhonglun.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.zhonglun.com/

Content

Enforcement

China

MOFCOM removes restrictive

conditions on the acquisition of a 33.6%

stake in Niuhai Holdings by Wal-Mart MOFCOM conditionally clears the

acquisition of SAB Miller by

Anheuser-Busch InBev SAIC announces the administrative

sanction decision against the Xilingol

branch of Inner Mongolia Radio and

Television Network for abuse of dominance SAIC announces the administrative

sanction decision against Hubei Insurance

Association for monopoly agreement Hubei Price Supervision Bureau fines

five natural gas suppliers for price monopoly NDRC fines three estazolam

pharmaceutical companies for monopoly

agreement Shanghai Price Supervision Bureau

fines three Haier appliance dealers for price

monopoly agreement NDRC officials attend London

College Competition Policy Forum

United States

FTC testifies before House Judiciary

Subcommittee regarding international

competition policy and enforcement FTC conditionally clears the merger of

Energy Transfer Equity, L.P., and the

Williams DOJ and North Carolina sue Carolinas

Healthcare System to eliminate unlawful

steering restrictions Two Japanese Auto Parts Companies,

U.S. Subsidiaries, and Five Executives

indicted for rigging automotive parts bids DOJ conditionally clears

Anheuser-Busch InBev’s acquisition of

SABMiller DOJ announces Nishikawa agrees to

plead guilty for fixing prices of automotive

parts FTC requires Teva to divest over 75

generic drugs to settle competition concerns

related to its acquisition of Allergan’s

generic business Officials from U.S. and Japan

participate in 35th bilateral meeting in

Washington to discuss antitrust enforcement

European Union

EC opens formal investigation into AB

InBev's practices on Belgian beer market EC conditionally clears acquisition of

an automotive component business of

Faurecia by Plastic Omnium EC takes further steps in investigations

alleging Google's comparison shopping and

advertising-related practices breach EU

rules EC fines truck producers € 2.93 billion

for participating in a cartel EC conditionally clears acquisition of

Meda by Mylan EC conditionally clears the acquisition

of Arianespace by ASL

Australia

Federal Court fines Woolworths for

laundry detergent cartel proceedings Federal Court finds cable

manufacturer engaged in cartel conduct Australia’s first criminal cartel charge

laid against NYK

Korea

KFTC fines eight ready-mix concrete

companies for price monopoly

Japan

JFTC solicits opinion on Amendment

of Consideration of Business Types in the

Definition Stipulation of Monopoly Status

Brazil

CADE clears Ingram Micro’s

acquisition by Tianjin Tianhai Investment Federal Court suspends CADE’s USD

126.2m fine on cement maker Itabira

Russia

FAS launches antitrust investigation

on Russia’s largest steel companies for

abuse of dominance

India

CCI clears NTT Data’s acquisition of

Dell Services CCI withdraws abuse of dominance

complaint against Vodafone

South Africa

SACC recommends approval of

Revertex/Ferro with conditions

Legislation

China

NDRC issues Antitrust Guideline on

Determination of Illegal Gains and Penalty

Scale in Connection with Monopolistic

Conduct of Undertakings (Exposure Draft)

United States

FTC raises civil penalty maximums to

adjust for inflation

FTC approves Fiscal Year 2015 Hart

Scott Rodino Premerger Notification Report

Korea

KFTC simplified the notification

materials for concentration of undertaking

Brazil

CADE publishes Guidelines for

Horizontal Mergers CADE publishes English-language

version of Guidelines for Leniency

Agreements

South Africa

SACC publishes final public interest

guidelines regarding mergers

August 2016 Issue 15

1 Disclaimer: This bulletin is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The transmission and receipt

of information contained in the document do not form or constitute an attorney-client relationship.

Enforcement

China

MOFCOM removes restrictive conditions on the acquisition of a 33.6% stake in Niuhai

Holdings by Wal-Mart

On June 8, 2016, Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) approved Wal-Mart’s application to

remove restrictive conditions on its acquisition of a 33.6% stake in Niuhai Holdings under

MOFCOM’s 49th

Announcement of 2012 (“the 49th

Announcement”). The 49th

Announcement

required Wal-Mart to fulfil the following obligations, (1) In connection with acquisition of

online shopping platform of Yihaodian held by Shanghai Yishiduo E-commerce by Niuhai

Shanghai, a company indirectly owned by Wal-Mart, Niuhai Shanghai shall confine the sale of

merchandise to its existing network platform; (2) Niuhai Shanghai shall not provide network

services to any other trading parties without gaining an operating permit for value-added

telecom services; (3) After completing the current transaction, Wal-Mart shall not use VIE

(Variable Interest Entity) structure to engage in value-added telecom services currently operated

by Yishiduo E-commerce.

In the assessment process, MOFCOM examined the implementation of conditions required

under the 49th

Announcement and the change in market competition situation, so as to

comprehensively assess the reasons and the impact of removing such restrictive conditions. In

addition, MOFCOM held several meetings with the concerned parties, asked them to submit

additional evidences and materials, and also solicited opinions from relevant third parties in

through meetings and in written form.

Upon assessment, MOFCOM found that Wal-Mart fulfilled the obligations required by the 49th

Announcement. In addition, MOFCOM determined that the relevant market competition

situation had changed substantially, and removal of the condition imposed under the 49th

Announcement would not have eliminative or restrictive impact on competition in the relevant

market. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

MOFCOM conditionally clears the acquisition of SAB Miller by Anheuser-Busch InBev

On July 29, 2016, MOFCOM published its conditional clearance decision on the acquisition of

SAB Miller by Anheuser-Busch InBev, imposing the condition that Anheuser-Busch InBev and

SAB Miller fulfill the following obligations: (1) Anheuser-Busch InBev and SAB Miller shall

divest 49% stake in Snow Beer from SAB Miller; (2) Anheuser-Busch InBev shall sell 49%

stake in Snow Beer to China Resources Beer Holdings by strictly complying with Sales and

Purchase Agreement it submitted to MOFCOM; (3) Anheuser-Busch InBev shall ensure that

divesture would be completed within 24 hours of the equity transfer contemplated by the

acquisition.

On March 8, 2016, MOFCOM received merger notification materials in connection with this

case. Upon preliminary review, MOFCOM determined that merger notification materials were

incomplete, and asked the undertakings to provide supplemental documents or materials within

prescribed time limit. On March 14, 2016, Anheuser-Busch InBev submitted proposed remedies

in which SAB Miller agreed to sell its 49% stake in Snow Beer, and a copy of Sales and

Purchase Agreement signed with China Resources Beer Holdings. On March 29, 2016,

MOFCOM docketed the case and began a preliminary review. Upon investigation, MOFCOM

determined that this transaction would have eliminative and restrictive effect on competition in

relevant market. For example, this transaction would increase market power of

Anheuser-Busch InBev, and result in the combination of the two closely competing leaders in

the relevant market.

http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/article/ztxx/201606/20160601335200.shtml




After several meetings with Anheuser-Busch InBev, MOFCOM determined that the final

proposals submitted by Anheuser-Busch InBev and SAB Miller in July would eliminate

potential anticompetitive effects. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

SAIC announces the administrative sanction decision against the Xilingol branch of Inner

Mongolia Radio and Television Network for abuse of dominance

On June 28, 2016, State Administration for Industry and Commerce (“SAIC”) announced the

administrative sanction decision made by Inner Mongolia Administration for Industry and

Commerce (“IMAIC”) on June 7, 2016 against the Xilingol branch of Inner Mongolia Radio

and Television Network (“the subject undertaking”) for abuse of dominance. IMAIC ordered it

to cease illegal conducts immediately, confiscated RMB 91,600.00 in illegal gains, and imposed

a fine of RMB 98,000.00 (1% of sales of relevant market in the preceding year).

In October 2015, during a market inspection, the Food and Drug Administration as well as the

Industry and Commerce Administration Bureau in Xilingol found that the subject undertaking

imposed unfair business terms on its customers by bundling pay TV subscription services

(RMB 4 per month) with basic maintenance services (RMB 26 per month). On November 13,

2015, as authorized by SAIC, IMAIC docketed the case and conducted antitrust investigation

against the subject undertaking for abuse of dominance.

In the course of its investigation, the relevant market was determined to be the market for cable

TV and Internet protocol television (IPTV) services in the urban areas of Xilinhot City, Xilingol

League. IMAIC found that the subject undertaking had abused its dominant market position and

in addition to paying basic maintenance services, forced customers to subscribe to its pay TV

subscription services that customers were entitled to choose freely and subscribe voluntarily.

The subject undertaking deprived the customers of self-determined choice rights, and infringed

lawful rights and interest of the customers. Therefore, IMAIC determined that the subject

undertaking violated Article 17 of AML, which provides that an undertaking with dominant

market position is prohibited from tying products or imposing any other unreasonable

additional transaction terms in the course of a transaction without justifiable cause. >>Read

More Back

---------------------------------

SAIC announces the administrative sanction decision against Hubei Insurance Association

for monopoly agreement

On August 16, 2016, SAIC announced the administrative sanction decision made by Hubei

Administration for Industry and Commerce (“HBAIC”) on May 6, 2016 against Hubei

Insurance Association (“the subject undertaking”) for monopoly agreement.

On March 7, 2013, as authorized by SAIC, HBAIC docketed the case and conducted antitrust

investigation against the subject undertaking for monopoly agreement in new car insurance

market of Wuhan city. Upon investigation, since May 2003, the subject undertaking convened

several meetings and reached monopoly agreement with insurance companies which were

qualified to engage in new car insurance. Therefore, HBAIC determined that the subject

undertaking violated Article 16 of AML, which provides that an industry association may not

organize the undertakings in such industry to engage in any monopolistic conduct prohibited by

Chapter Two of the AML. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Hubei Price Supervision Bureau fines five natural gas suppliers for price monopoly

On July 12, 2016, National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) published a

press release that Hubei Price Supervision Bureau imposed fines of RMB 2,955,000 in

http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/article/ztxx/201607/20160701369044.shtml

http://www.saic.gov.cn/zwgk/gggs/jzzf/201606/t20160628_169405.html






combined penalties on five natural gas suppliers for abuse of dominant market position. The

five natural gas suppliers were the Xianning branch of Petro China Kunlun Gas, Xiantao Petro

China Kunlun Gas, Daye China Resources Gas, Jiangxia China Resources Gas, and Shishou

City Natural Gas Company (“the subject undertakings”).

In the course of its investigation, Hubei Price Supervision Bureau found that the subject

undertakings had abused their dominant market position in the market for construction and

installation of pipeline facilities since 2013. The subject undertakings deprived the other parties

of the rights in a transaction to select design, construction and supervision services, and forced

non-resident to pay construction and installation fees at an unfairly high price. Therefore, Hubei

Price Supervision Bureau determined that the subject undertakings violated Article 17 of AML,

which provides that an undertaking with dominant market position is prohibited from selling a

product at unfairly high prices. >>Read More Back

--------------------------------

NDRC fines three estazolam pharmaceutical companies for monopoly agreement

On July 27, 2016, NDRC announced on its official website its administrative sanction decision

against three estazolam pharmaceutical companies for reaching and implementing monopoly

agreement on the sale of estazolam active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and tablets. NDRC

ordered it to cease implementation of the monopoly agreement and imposed total fines of RMB

2,600,000. The three companies were Huazhong Pharmaceutical, Shandong Xinyi

Pharmaceutical, and Changzhou Siyao Pharmacy (“the subject undertakings”).

In April, 2016, NDRC conducted anti-monopoly investigation against three estazolam

pharmaceutical producers. Huazhong Pharmaceutical, Shandong Xinyi Pharmaceutical, and

Changzhou Siyao Pharmacy were independent market entities engaged in manufacturing

estazolam active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), and the competing companies in the

estazolam APIs and tablets market. In the course of its investigation, NDRC found that after the

government’s announcement of a policy on low-priced drug, the subject undertakings reached

and implemented a monopoly agreement to fix or change product price through meetings,

telephone calls, text messages and e-mails.

Therefore, NDRC determined that the subject undertakings eliminated and restricted

competition in tablets market, and violated Article 13 of AML, which provides that the

competing undertakings are prohibited from fixing or changing product price, and jointly

boycotting a transaction. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Shanghai Price Supervision Bureau fines three Haier appliance dealers for price

monopoly agreement

On August 12, 2016, NDRC announced on its official website a press release concerning

decision made by Shanghai Price Supervision Bureau against Shanghai Branch of Chongqing

RRS Household Appliances Selling Company, Chongqing Haier Electronics Selling Company

and Chongqing Haier Household Appliances Selling Company (“the subject undertakings”) for

price monopoly agreement. Shanghai Price Supervision Bureau imposed total fines of RMB 12.

3 million on the subject undertakings.

In June 2015, the price supervision platform 12358 received case tips that the subject

undertakings engaged in reaching and implementing price control and monopoly agreement.

Upon investigation, since 2012, the subject undertakings released sale policy, issued market

administration orders and entered into distribution agreements with price restriction. The

subject undertakings implemented price monopoly agreement, eliminated or restricted market

price competition, and disrupted normal market order. Therefore, Shanghai Price Supervision

Bureau determined that the subject undertakings violated Article 14 of AML, which provides

that an undertaking is prohibited from setting minimum product price for resale to third

http://jjs.ndrc.gov.cn/fjgld/201607/t20160712_811023.html

http://jjs.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201607/t20160727_812589.html




parties. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

NDRC officials attend London College Competition Policy Forum

In June 2016, Li Qing, the Deputy Director of the Price Supervision and Anti-monopoly Bureau

of NDRC, led a team from NDRC to attend the Competition Policy Forum held in Brussels,

Belgium. The seminar was hosted by the Jevons Institute for Competition Law and Economics at

University College London and focused on international cooperation in antimonopoly

enforcement and the application of economic analysis in such enforcement. The representatives

of competition enforcement authorities, competition judges, antitrust lawyers and academia from

EU, United Stated, UK, and France attended the Forum.

In her speech, Li spoke on antimonopoly enforcement and competition policy in China, and

covered antimonopoly law enforcement condition in China since 2015, the recent progress made

in drafting the State Council’s antitrust guidelines and the development of competition

policy. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

United States

FTC testifies before House Judiciary Subcommittee regarding international competition

policy and enforcement

On June 7, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) outlined its perspectives on

international competition policy and enforcement in testimony presented to the U.S. House

Judiciary Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law.

In testimony presented to the subcommittee, FTC described its work in bilateral and multilateral

forums to promote convergence toward best practices, the resulting successes, and the remaining

challenges. The testimony noted also that through bilateral engagement, and by taking a leading

role in broader U.S. government efforts, the FTC had encouraged China’s and other jurisdictions’

agencies to ensure that their enforcement procedures and substantive approaches provide

appropriate transparency and fairness.

With respect to intellectual property-related antitrust enforcement, the FTC and the Department

of Justice (“DOJ”) continued to convey concerns about provisions of China’s Anti-monopoly

Law that prohibit unfairly high pricing and unduly restrict unilateral refusals to deal. According

to the testimony, these provisions had the potential to reduce incentives for innovation not only in

China, but also around the world. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

FTC conditionally clears the merger of Energy Transfer Equity, L.P., and the Williams

On June 9, 2016, FTC announced that energy companies Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. (“ETE”),

and the Williams Companies, Inc., would divest Williams’ interest in an interstate natural gas

pipeline to settle FTC charges that ETE’s proposed acquisition of Williams would likely harm

competition in Florida.

According to the FTC’s complaint, absent a remedy, the proposed merger, initially valued at

$37.7 billion, would have reduced competition in the market for “firm” – i.e., guaranteed –

pipeline capacity to deliver natural gas to points within the Florida peninsula. It also would have

resulted in a pipeline monopoly at many natural gas delivery points within the peninsula.

The consent agreement required the newly merged company – Energy Transfer Corp LP – to

divest to a Commission-approved buyer its interest in Gulfstream within 180 days after the

completion of this acquisition. Energy Transfer Corp was required under the order to maintain

http://www.sdpc.gov.cn/xwzx/xwfb/201608/t20160812_814604.html

http://jjs.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201606/t20160627_808707.html

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/06/ftc-testifies-house-judiciary-subcommittee-regarding




Gulfstream as a viable, competitive, and marketable asset until the divestiture had been

completed. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

DOJ and North Carolina sue Carolinas Healthcare System to eliminate unlawful steering

restrictions

On June 9, 2016, DOJ and the state of North Carolina filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against

Carolinas HealthCare System (“CHS”) challenging CHS’s practice of imposing steering

restrictions in its contracts with commercial health insurers in the Charlotte, North Carolina, area.

CHS is the largest healthcare system in North Carolina, with its approximately 50 percent share

in the sale of acute inpatient hospital services to health insurers in the Charlotte area, and also one

of the largest not-for-profit healthcare systems in the United States. According to the

department’s complaint, CHS had used its market power to require steering restrictions in its

contracts with every major insurer. These provisions had prevented insurers from introducing

health plans that encourage patients to use medical providers that offer lower priced,

higher-quality services. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Two Japanese Auto Parts Companies, U.S. Subsidiaries, and Five Executives indicted for

rigging automotive parts bids

On June 15, 2016, DOJ announced a federal grand jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern

District of Ohio returned two indictments charging Japanese automotive parts companies, their

U.S. subsidiaries, and a total of five executives for their alleged participation in international

conspiracies to eliminate competition in the sale of automotive parts sold in the United States and

elsewhere.

One of the indictments, filed in Cincinnati, charged Tokai Kogyo Co. Ltd., its wholly-owned U.S.

subsidiary, Green Tokai Co. Ltd., and executive Akitada Tazumi with conspiring to rig bids for

and fix the prices of automotive body sealing products sold to Honda Motor Company Ltd. and

certain of its subsidiaries and affiliates for installation in vehicles manufactured and sold in the

United States and elsewhere.

In a separate indictment, also filed in Cincinnati, Maruyasu Industries Co. Ltd., its wholly-owned

U.S. subsidiary, Curtis-Maruyasu America Inc. (“CMA”) and four executives were charged with

conspiring to fix prices, allocate customers, and rig bids for automotive steel tubes sold in the

United States and elsewhere. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

DOJ conditionally clears Anheuser-Busch InBev’s acquisition of SABMiller

On July 20, 2016, DOJ announced that it had agreed to a settlement with Anheuser-Busch InBev

(“ABI”) that would permit ABI to proceed with its acquisition of SABMiller. The settlement

required ABI to divest SABMiller’s entire U.S. business – including SABMiller’s ownership

interest in MillerCoors, the right to brew and sell certain SABMiller beers in the United States

and the worldwide Miller beer brand rights. This settlement would prevent any increase in

concentration in the U.S. beer industry.

The settlement also prohibited ABI from instituting or continuing practices and programs that

limit the ability and incentives of independent beer distributors to sell and promote the beers of

ABI’s rivals, including high-end craft and import beers. Moreover, the settlement precluded ABI

from acquiring beer distributors or brewers – including non-HSR reportable craft brewer

acquisitions – without allowing for department review of the acquisition’s likely competitive

effects. >>Read More Back

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/06/ftc-puts-conditions-merger-energy-transfer-equity-lp-williams

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-and-north-carolina-sue-carolinas-healthcare-system-eliminate-unlawful

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-japanese-auto-parts-companies-us-subsidiaries-and-five-executives-indicted-rigging

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-requires-anheuser-busch-inbev-divest-stake-millercoors-and-alter-beer




---------------------------------

DOJ announces Nishikawa agrees to plead guilty for fixing prices of automotive parts

On July 20, 2016, DOJ announced that Nishikawa Rubber Co. Ltd. (“Nishikawa”) had agreed to

plead guilty and pay a $130 million criminal fine for its role in a conspiracy to fix the prices of

and rig the bids for automotive body sealing products installed in cars sold to U.S. consumers.

According to charges filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Nishikawa

conspired from at least as early as January 2000 until at least September 2012 to fix the prices and

rig bids of automotive body sealing products sold to Honda Motor Company Ltd., Toyota Motor

Corporation, Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. (Subaru) and certain of their subsidiaries and affiliates in

the United States and elsewhere. Nishikawa agreed to cooperate in the department’s ongoing

investigation. The plea agreement would be subject to court approval. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

FTC requires Teva to divest over 75 generic drugs to settle competition concerns related to

its acquisition of Allergan’s generic business

On July 27, 2016, FTC announced that Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. had agreed to sell the

rights and assets related to 79 pharmaceutical products to settle FTC charges that its proposed

$40.5 billion acquisition of Allergan plc’s generic pharmaceutical business would be

anticompetitive. The remedy required Teva to divest the drug portfolio to eleven firms, and

marked the largest drug divestiture order in an FTC pharmaceutical merger case.

The divested products included antibiotics, weight loss drugs, oral contraceptives, and treatments

for a wide variety of diseases and conditions, including ADHD, allergies, arthritis, cancers,

diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, mental illnesses, opioid dependence, pain,

Parkinson’s disease, and respiratory, skin and sleep disorders. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Officials from U.S. and Japan participate in 35th bilateral meeting in Washington to

discuss antitrust enforcement

On July 14, 2016, the heads of the antitrust agencies of the United States and Japan met in

Washington for their 35th Bilateral Competition Consultation. Principal Deputy Assistant

Attorney General Renata Hesse of the U.S. DOJ’s Antitrust Division and FTC Chairwoman Edith

Ramirez participated in high level meetings with senior officials from Japan’s Fair Trade

Commission (“JFTC”), including JFTC Chairman Kazuyuki Sugimoto.

The discussions covered a wide range of topics, including recent enforcement developments,

antitrust policy and enforcement involving intellectual property and technology and international

enforcement cooperation. The purpose of the meeting was to reinforce ties of cooperation and

share knowledge in light of the increasing internationalization of antitrust enforcement. >>Read

More Back

---------------------------------

European Union

EC opens formal investigation into AB InBev's practices on Belgian beer market

On June 30, 2016, the European Commission (“EC”) opened an investigation, on its own

initiative, to assess whether Anheuser-Busch InBev SA (“AB InBev”) had abused its dominant

position on the Belgian beer market by hindering imports of its beer from neighbouring countries,

in breach of EU antitrust rules.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nishikawa-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-130-million-criminal-fine-fixing-prices-automotive

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/07/ftc-requires-teva-divest-over-75-generic-drugs-rival-firms-settle

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/officials-us-and-japan-participate-35th-bilateral-meeting-washington-discuss-antitrust

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/officials-us-and-japan-participate-35th-bilateral-meeting-washington-discuss-antitrust




EC would investigate further to establish whether its initial concerns were confirmed: its

preliminary view was that AB InBev may be pursuing a deliberate strategy to restrict so-called

'parallel trade' of its beer from less expensive countries, such as the Netherlands and France, to

the more expensive Belgian market. In particular, EC would investigate certain potentially

anti-competitive practices by AB InBev such as: possibly changing the packaging of beer

cans/bottles to make it harder to sell them in other countries; possibly limiting “non-Belgian”

retailers access to rebates and key products to prevent them from bringing less expensive beer

products to Belgium. If established, such behaviours would create anti-competitive obstacles to

trade within the EU's Single Market and breach Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of

the European Union (TFEU). >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

EC conditionally clears acquisition of an automotive component business of Faurecia by

Plastic Omnium

On July 11, 2016, EC cleared under the EU Merger Regulation the proposed acquisition of the

automotive plastic exterior component business of Faurecia by Companies Plastic Omnium, both

of France. The clearance was conditional upon divestment of some production facilities in France,

Spain and Germany.

Both Plastic Omnium and the Faurecia business that it is acquiring manufacture plastic exterior

components for the automotive sector such as bumpers and hatchbacks/tailgates. EC had

concerns that the merged entity would not have faced sufficient competitive pressure from the

remaining players in the market for the production and supply of plastic bumpers in the North,

East, and West of France, Belgium and Spain. The investigation also raised competition concerns

on the market for the production and supply of so-called front-end carriers (the structural

component behind the bumper), plastic hatchbacks/tailgates and for the assembly of so-called

front-end modules (complete front assemblies often including the front-end carrier, crash beam,

bumper, grilles, etc.) at European Economic Area level.

To address the Commission's competition concerns, Plastic Omnium submitted the following

commitments: Plastic Omnium offered to divest five Faurecia plants mostly dedicated to the

production of plastic bumpers (four in France, one in Spain); Plastic Omnium also committed to

divest two Faurecia plants dedicated to the assembly of front-end modules in Germany, including

the research and development (R&D) center connected to these plants. These commitments

addressed all competition concerns identified by EC. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

EC takes further steps in investigations alleging Google's comparison shopping and

advertising-related practices breach EU rules

On 14 July 2016, EC sent two Statements of Objections to Google. EC had reinforced, in a

supplementary Statement of Objections, its preliminary conclusion that Google had abused its

dominant position by systematically favouring its comparison shopping service in its search

result pages. Separately, EC had also informed Google in a Statement of Objections of its

preliminary view that the company had abused its dominant position by artificially restricting the

possibility of third party websites to display search advertisements from Google's competitors.

Today's supplementary Statement of Objections outlined a broad range of additional evidence

and data that reinforces the Commission's preliminary conclusion that Google had abused its

dominant position by systematically favouring its own comparison shopping service in its

general search results. EC continued to consider that comparison shopping services and merchant

platforms belong to separate markets. In any event, today's supplementary Statement of

Objections found that even if merchant platforms were included in the market affected by

Google's practices, comparison shopping services were a significant part of that market and

Google's conduct had weakened or even marginalised competition from its closest rivals.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2361_en.htm





EC had also sent a Statement of Objections to Google on restrictions that the company had placed

on the ability of certain third party websites to display search advertisements from Google's

competitors. The Commission's preliminary view set out in today's Statement of Objections was

that these practices had enabled Google to protect its dominant position in online search

advertising. It had prevented existing and potential competitors, including other search providers

and online advertising platforms, from entering and growing in this commercially important area.

Google and Alphabet had 10 weeks to respond to the Statement of Objections. >>Read More

Back

---------------------------------

EC fines truck producers € 2.93 billion for participating in a cartel

On July 19, 2016, EC found that MAN, Volvo/Renault, Daimler, Iveco, and DAF broke EU

antitrust rules. These truck makers colluded for 14 years on truck pricing and on passing on the

costs of compliance with stricter emission rules. EC imposed a record fine of € 2 926 499 000.

MAN was not fined as it revealed the existence of the cartel to EC. All companies acknowledged

their involvement and agreed to settle the case.

The Commission's investigation revealed that MAN, Volvo/Renault, Daimler, Iveco and DAF

had engaged in a cartel relating to: coordinating prices at "gross list" level for medium and heavy

trucks in the European Economic Area (EEA); the timing for the introduction of emission

technologies for medium and heavy trucks to comply with the increasingly strict European

emissions standards; the passing on to customers of the costs for the emissions technologies

required to comply with the increasingly strict European emissions standards. The infringement

covered the entire EEA and lasted 14 years, from 1997 until 2011.

Today's decision followed the sending of a Statement of Objections to the trucks producers in

November 2014. In the context of this investigation, proceedings were also opened with regard to

Scania. Scania was not covered by this settlement decision and therefore the investigation would

continue under the standard (non-settlement) cartel procedure for this company. >>Read More

Back

---------------------------------

EC conditionally clears acquisition of Meda by Mylan

On July 20, 2016, EC approved under the EU Merger Regulation the proposed acquisition of

Meda AB of Sweden by Mylan N.V. of the Netherlands, subject to conditions. Mylan is a Dutch

company, publicly listed in the US that develops, licenses, manufactures, markets and distributes

generic, branded generic and specialty pharmaceuticals, mainly on prescription. Meda is a

publicly listed Swedish company that manufactures, markets and distributes both generic and

specialty pharmaceuticals, 'over-the-counter' and on prescription.

EC examined the effects of the proposed transaction on competition in several therapeutic areas.

The Commission's investigation found that for the majority of the products no competition

concerns arise. However, EC identified 15 markets where it had competition concerns, in

particular because of the strong position of the two companies and the lack of sufficient

alternatives on the market.

To address these concerns, Mylan offered to divest its own or Meda's local businesses in the

markets concerned, including the relevant marketing authorizations, customer information and

brands, where relevant. This package of commitments addressed all of the Commission's

competition concerns. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

EC conditionally clears the acquisition of Arianespace by ASL

On July 20, 2016, EC approved conditionally under the EU Merger Regulation, the acquisition







of Arianespace by Airbus Safran Launchers (ASL), a joint venture between Airbus and Safran.

The transaction was notified to EC on 8 January 2016. In February 2016, EC opened an in-depth

investigation to assess the proposed takeover. The investigation confirmed the Commission's

preliminary concerned that potential flows of sensitive information between the companies could

harm competition. This related in particular to (i) flows of information from Arianespace to

Airbus about other satellite manufacturers and (ii) flows of information from Airbus to

Arianespace about other launch service providers. These potential flows of information could

result in less competitive tenders and less innovation in the markets for satellites and launch

services.

In order to address the Commission's concerns, the companies offered to: implement firewalls

between Airbus and Arianespace to prevent information flows that could harm competitors; put

in place measures restricting employees' mobility between the companies; provide for an

arbitration mechanism to be included in all their future non-disclosure agreements signed with

third parties, to ensure the effective implementation of the firewalls. The commitments offered

by ASL address the Commission’s concerns in full as they will prevent any exchange of sensitive

information between Airbus and Arianespace to the detriment of competing satellite

manufacturers and launch service providers. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Australia

Federal Court fines Woolworths for laundry detergent cartel proceedings

On June 3, 2016, the Federal Court ordered Woolworths Limited (“Woolworths”) to pay

penalties totaling $9 million for contraventions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (now called the

Competition and Consumer Act 2010), following admissions made by Woolworths in

proceedings brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (“ACCC”).

Woolworths admitted to being knowingly concerned in the making of, and giving effect to, an

understanding between Colgate-Palmolive Pty Ltd (Colgate), PZ Cussons Australia Pty Ltd

(Cussons) and Unilever Australia Limited (Unilever) that they would each cease supplying

standard concentrate laundry detergents to Woolworths in early 2009 and supply only ultra

concentrates to Woolworths from that time. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Federal Court finds cable manufacturer engaged in cartel conduct

On July 21, 2016, the Federal Court found that an Italian corporation, Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi

S.R.L. (Prysmian), engaged in cartel conduct in relation to the supply of high voltage land cables

in Australia, in proceedings brought by ACCC.

“This is another example of the ACCC enforcing Australian cartel laws in relation to collusive

arrangements made outside of Australia but which have the potential to affect Australian

consumers and businesses,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Australia’s first criminal cartel charge laid against NYK

On July 18, 2016, following an investigation by ACCC, Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha (NYK),

a global shipping company based in Japan, had pleaded guilty to criminal cartel conduct in the

Federal Court.

“This is the first criminal charge laid against a corporation under the criminal cartel provisions of

the Competition and Consumer Act,” Mr. Sims said. “This matter relates to alleged cartel conduct

in connection with the transportation of vehicles, including cars, trucks, and buses, to Australia


http://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/woolworths-ordered-to-pay-9-million-in-penalties-in-laundry-detergent-cartel-proceedings

http://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/federal-court-finds-cable-manufacturer-engaged-in-cartel-conduct




between July 2009 and September 2012.” >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Korea

KFTC fines eight ready-mix concrete companies for price monopoly

On July 27, 2016, the Korea Fair Trade Commission (“KFTC”) fined eight ready-mix concrete

companies in Dangjin city to undertake corrective measures.

These eight companies held two meetings in April and June 2013 in order to uniformly increase

prices of ready-mix concrete sold to construction firms when price of ready-mix concrete and

raw materials had increased. KFTC determined that these companies restricted market

competition in the ready-mix concrete market of Dangjin city and violated the Fair Trade Law.

KFTC fined these companies against such anticompetitive conduct and required local entities to

establish fair competition practices. KFTC expected that this punishment may provide a positive

influence on price competition between ready-mix concrete companies and establish fair

competition practices. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Japan

JFTC solicits opinion on Amendment of Consideration of Business Types in the Definition

Stipulation of Monopoly Status

On August 5, 2016, in order to appropriately apply the Antitrust Law Article 8.4 (measures to

monopoly status), the apan Fair Trade Commission (“JFTC”) drafted and announced the

Consideration of Business Types in the Definition Stipulation of Monopoly Status, in which the

standard of certain business types was explicitly stipulated as attachment. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Brazil

CADE clears Ingram Micro’s acquisition by Tianjin Tianhai Investment

On June 27, 2016, the General Superintendent’s Office of the Administrative Council for

Economic Defense (“CADE”) cleared the proposed acquisition of Ingram Micro Inc. (NYSE:

IM) by Tianjin Tianhai Investment Company, Ltd. (SHA: 600751). The proposed merger was

filed with CADE on June 22.

Ingram is active in distribution/logistics and related services for IT products and other electronic

products. TTIC provides shipping services through five China-South Korea shipping routes, and

three domestic shipping routes. It is solely controlled by HNA Group -- which has interests in

aviation, real estate, financial services, tourism and logistics, among others.

As reported, on February 17, Ingram Micro entered into a definitive merger agreement to be

acquired by Tianjin Tianhai for USD 38.90 per share in an all-cash transaction with an equity

value of approximately USD 6bn. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Federal Court suspends CADE’s USD 126.2m fine on cement maker Itabira

On July 25, 2016, the Federal Court suspended a BLR 411m (USD 126.2m) fine levied by

Brazil’s Antitrust Authority CADE on cement maker Itabira in a cartel proceeding.

http://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/australia%E2%80%99s-first-criminal-cartel-charge-laid-against-nyk

http://www.ftc.go.kr/news/policy/competeView.jsp?news_no=3015&news_div_cd=1&currpage=1&searchKey=&searchVal=

http://www.jftc.go.jp/houdou/pressrelease/h28/aug/160805.html

http://sei.cade.gov.br/sei/institucional/pesquisa/documento_consulta_externa.php?C_fM0ttVdLSl1HQf7zbY66gnaLOG-OrmJJryJW4-mRYCP7RLZkjNAmRM1gDG5wugiakzr4htwKwEKdjjNZrEig,,




As reported, on July 29, 2015, CADE upheld the BRL 3.1bn (USD 952m) in fines it had imposed

on six cement makers in 2014 for cartel. In upholding its 2014 decision, CADE stipulated that the

defendants must pay the imposed fines within 30 days and sell stakes in cement and concrete

assets within one year.

According to CADE, the convicted companies fixed prices and divided cement and concrete

market shares in Brazil. In addition, they colluded to allocate customers and bar new entrants

from the market.

CADE’s decision also stated that the alleged cartelists promoted actions against non-cartel

members, such as changing technical regulations on cement and concrete in order to artificially

raise the barriers to entry in these markets, the item added. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Russia

FAS launches antitrust investigation on Russia’s largest steel companies for abuse of

dominance

On July 21, 2016, the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (“FAS”) announced that it opened

an investigation into three major steel firms for abuse of dominance.

A price analysis had shown a sharp price rise over the last few months for steel bars used in

reinforced concrete. The press release mentioned Severstal, Chelyabinsk Metallurgical Plant

and EVRAZ appeared to monopolize the market. The companies sold their products through

several affiliates.

“The augmentation of the price for reinforcement bars in April 2016 exceeded the costs necessary

for their production and sale,” noted Dmitry Chuklino, deputy head of the Department for

Industry Control. “That is why FAS Russia suspects these companies of setting monopolistically

high prices for these products.”

The analysis of the sales prices showed a 34% increase for the products of EVRAZ ZSMK

between January and April 2016 and a 103% increase for Severstal. CMK products became 70%

more expensive between December 2015 and May 2016.

FAS indicated that, apart from its price monitoring, the case was initiated on the basis of

complaints by individuals and businesses. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

India

CCI clears NTT Data’s acquisition of Dell Services

On June 27, 2016, the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) approved Japan's NTT Data's

proposal to acquire Dell Services, the IT services arm of PC maker Dell.

In March, Dell agreed to sell its IT services business -- formerly known as Perot Systems -- to the

Japanese company for USD 3bn. Through the transaction, NTT would be able to increase its

presence in North America, strengthen and expand its global delivery network and bolster its

infrastructure services capabilities.

According to previous media reports, the deal with NTT Data was part of a reorganization by

Dell as it prepares to purchase data storage provider EMC for USD 67bn. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

http://www.conjur.com.br/2016-jul-29/fabricante-cimento-suspender-multa-cade-cartel#author

http://en.fas.gov.ru/press-center/news/detail.html?id=46543

http://www.cci.gov.in/sites/default/files/notice_order_summary_doc/C-2016-04-392.pdf




CCI withdraws abuse of dominance complaint against Vodafone

According to a regulatory order made public in June, CCI withdrawn an abuse of dominance

complaint against telco Vodafone India.

Upon CCI order, an individual complaint alleged that the local unit of UK-based Vodafone was

imposing unfair or discriminatory charges for international roaming services.

The regulator said the relevant market, which was the market for the provision of international

mobile data services in Mumbai city, appeared to be competitive. The company did not have a

market dominant position, and other service providers also had comparable size and resources in

relevant market. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

South Africa

SACC recommends approval of Revertex/Ferro with conditions

On July 28, 2016 the South African Competition Commission (“SACC”) had recommended that

the Competition Tribunal conditionally cleared the acquisition of Revertex by Ferro Coating,

wholly owned by Ferro South Africa.

Ferro Coating manufactures and distributes resins and additives for the architectural, industrial,

construction, adhesives and graphics markets. Post-merger Ferro Coating would control

Revertex. The Tribunal approved the merger subject to a divestiture condition proposed by the

Commission and agreed to by the parties inserted to allay concerns relating to information

sharing. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Legislation

China

NDRC issues Antitrust Guideline on Determination of Illegal Gains and Penalty Scale in

Connection with Monopolistic Conduct of Undertakings (Exposure Draft)

On June 17, 2016, the Price Supervision and Anti-monopoly Bureau of NDRC issued the

Antitrust Guideline on Determination of Illegal Gains and Penalty Scale in Connection with

Monopolistic Conduct of Undertakings (Exposure Draft).

The Guideline focused on definition of illegal gains, major consideration factors, special

circumstances and how to determine the situation where no illegal gains are obtained. In

addition, the Guideline also stipulated the penalty determination process and basic scale of

penalty, etc. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

United States

FTC raises civil penalty maximums to adjust for inflation

On June 29, 2016, FTC announced that it had approved final amendments to Commission Rule

1.98 that adjust the maximum civil penalty dollar amounts for violations of 16 provisions of law

the FTC enforces, as required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act

Improvements Act of 2015.

http://www.cci.gov.in/sites/default/files/042016.pdf

http://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Commission-Statement-28-July-1.pdf

http://jjs.ndrc.gov.cn/fjgld/201606/t20160617_807541.html




The Act directed agencies to implement a “catch-up” inflation adjustment based on a prescribed

formula. The maximum civil penalty amount had increased from $16,000 to $40,000 for several

violations. The new maximum civil penalty amounts took effect on August 1, 2016. >>Read

More Back

---------------------------------

FTC approves Fiscal Year 2015 Hart Scott Rodino Premerger Notification Report

On August 1, 2016, FTC together with DOJ released the 38th Annual Hart-Scott-Rodino Report.

The report presented fiscal year 2015 data on the HSR Premerger Notification Program, which

was key to alerting the agencies to transactions that may substantially lessen competition in

violation of federal law.

The report noted that 1,801 transactions were reported to antitrust agencies during fiscal year

2015, an 8.3 percent increase from the 1,663 transactions reported in fiscal year 2014. The report

summarized the agencies’ merger enforcement activities, highlighting the 42 merger enforcement

actions taken to preserve competition in diverse and important sectors of the economy, including

consumer goods and services, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, high tech and industrial goods, and

energy. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Korea

KFTC simplified the notification materials for concentration of undertaking

On June 20, 2016, KFTC revised guideline on notification of concentration of undertakings and

simplified the notification materials.

For simple cases, it didn’t submit below materials of market status, such as competing company,

market share and etc. For Korean listed companies, it didn’t submit these documents relating to

affiliated companies and shareholders status if its reports or other had been disclosed.

This amendment would reduce the notification burden of the undertakings. KFTC thought

approximate 85% of the notification (according to the data of year 2015, 566 cases of 669 cases,)

would benefit from this amendment. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

Brazil

CADE publishes Guidelines for Horizontal Mergers

On July 27, 2016, Brazil’s Competition Authority CADE published its Guidelines for Horizontal

Mergers, according to a CADE press statement.

The document, which received comments between 17 March and 30 April through a public

consultation, expounded CADE’s methodology used to review transactions involving agents

operating in the same level of a production chain, the statement said.

The document was based on the following elements: review, origin of the information used,

relevant market, concentration level, unilateral effects, purchase power and etc. This was the

second document published by CADE on the matter, the item said. CADE developed its first

guidelines on horizontal mergers in 2001, along with the now-defunct Justice Ministry Consumer

Affairs Division (SDE) of the Ministry of Justice and the Finance Ministry Price Administration

Bureau (SAE). >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/06/ftc-raises-civil-penalty-maximums-adjust-inflation

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/06/ftc-raises-civil-penalty-maximums-adjust-inflation

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/08/ftc-approves-fiscal-year-2015-hart-scott-rodino-premerger

http://www.ftc.go.kr/news/policy/competeView.jsp?news_no=2974&news_div_cd=1&currpage=4&searchKey=&searchVal=

http://en.cade.gov.br/press-releases/cade-publishes-guidelines-on-horizontal-mergers




CADE publishes English-language version of Guidelines for Leniency Agreements

On June 23, 2016, CADE published on its website the English-language version of its

Guidelines for Leniency Agreements, according to a CADE press statement. The

Portuguese-language version of the document was published on 25 May.

The document featured the best practices and procedures normally adopted by CADE’s General

Superintendent’s Office (SG) in the negotiation, signing and conduction of leniency agreements,

the statement said.

The document reflected CADE’s more than 15-year experience in the signing of leniency

agreements, according to the statement. The guidelines hoped to strengthen and expand

CADE’s leniency program, providing more transparency, accessibility, predictability and legal

certainty to leniency negotiations. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------

South Africa

SACC publishes final public interest guidelines regarding mergers

On June 8, 2016, SACC published the final guidelines for the assessment of public interest

provisions in merger regulation under the Competition Act, according to a commission press

release.

The guidelines had been prepared in terms of section 79(1) of the Competition Act which

provided that SACC may adopt guidelines to indicate its policy approach on any matter falling

within its jurisdiction.

The guidelines sought to provide guidance on the commission’s approach to analyzing mergers

by indicating the approach that the commission was likely to follow and the types of

information that SACC may require when evaluating public interest grounds in terms of section

12A(3) of the Competition Act, the press release noted.

In the process of preparing these guidelines, SACC followed a series of opinions from various

stakeholders, include legal practitioners, business and civil society, etc. SACC had revised the

guidelines on the basic of opinions. >>Read More Back

---------------------------------------------------

Copyright©2016 Zhong Lun Law Firm. All Rights Reserved

http://en.cade.gov.br/press-releases/cade-publishes-english-version-of-the-guidelines-on-antitrust-leniency-program

http://www.compcom.co.za/guidelines-for-the-assessment-of-public-interest-provisions-in-mergers/

Competition Law Bulletin - Zhong Lun Competition Law Bulletin_August. 2016_En.pdfCompetition Law...

Documents

Transcript of Competition Law Bulletin - Zhong Lun Competition Law Bulletin_August. 2016_En.pdfCompetition Law...