Summary of Key Developments — January/February 2026

The "European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin" breaks down the major antitrust developments in Europe during the past two months into concise and actionable takeaways. For any questions or suggestions please contact Jindrich Kloub, Deirdre Carroll, or any other attorney in the European Antitrust Team listed at the end of the Bulletin.

UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) Fast-Tracks ABF/Hovis Deal to In-Depth Investigation
On January 8, 2026, the CMA announced that it had decided to refer the anticipated acquisition by Associated British Foods (ABF) of Hovis to an in-depth Phase 2 investigation under the UK merger control regime.

The fast-track referral cuts short the CMA's Phase 1 review of the proposed transaction, during which it identified potential competition concerns in the supply of packaged bread and related bakery products in the UK. In its decision, the CMA concluded that the merger gives rise to a realistic prospect of a substantial lessening of competition in certain local and national markets, warranting a more detailed examination. The CMA's concerns focus in particular on horizontal overlaps between ABF's Kingsmill business and Hovis, two of the UK's largest branded bread suppliers. This is the first fast-track referral under the CMA's update merger guidance which no longer requires the parties to concede that the transaction gives rise to a substantial lessening of competition when requesting fast-track Phase 2 review.

Companies contemplating mergers in the UK should anticipate rigorous review where transactions involve close competitors or leading brands. Under the CMA's revised merger control guidance, the fast-track procedure potentially allows for meaningful time savings where the parties identify overlaps and engage with the CMA proactively with a clear strategy.

Norway to Fine Oil Service Company for Providing Incorrect Information in Merger Inquiry
On February 19, 2026, the Norwegian Competition Authority (NCA) announced that it intends to fine Schlumberger NOK 30 million (approximately US$3.1 million) for allegedly providing incorrect or incomplete information in connection with its merger notification relating to the acquisition of ChampionX Corporation.

The NCA found that certain information submitted as part of the merger review, including details concerning the parties' positions in previous tender processes and aspects of their product offerings on the Norwegian Continental Shelf, did not accurately reflect the factual situation. According to the NCA, the information in question was relevant to its competitive assessment of the transaction and to its ability to conduct an effective review within the applicable statutory time limits.

Companies should be aware that providing inaccurate or misleading information in merger investigations, even absent a substantive competition violation, can expose them to significant financial penalties and reputational risk.

CMA Orders Unwinding of Aramark/Entier Transaction
On February 25, 2026, the CMA announced that it had ordered Aramark Group to sell Entier after concluding that the completed acquisition resulted in a substantial lessening of competition in the supply of offshore catering and support services on the UK Continental Shelf.

The CMA's in-depth Phase 2 investigation found that the transaction combined two of the three main suppliers of offshore catering services to oil and gas operators, removing a close and credible competitor. The authority determined that the merger reduced competitive pressure in a concentrated market where customers rely on a limited number of experienced providers capable of delivering complex catering and facilities management services in remote offshore environments. The CMA assessed potential remedies but concluded that divestiture of Entier in full to a suitable purchaser was the only effective means of restoring competition. Aramark must now complete the sale within a specified timeframe, subject to CMA approval of the buyer.

Companies pursuing acquisitions in the UK should carefully assess potential overlaps and consider engagement strategies early in the transaction process, as the CMA retains broad powers to impose structural remedies, including full divestments, even after integration has begun.

European Union (EU) Court Upholds Airfreight Cartel Fines
On February 26, 2026, the EU's highest court, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), mostly upheld fines imposed on multiple airlines for participating in the airfreight cartel, confirming the European Commission's (EC's) findings that the carriers had coordinated surcharges on air cargo services between December 1999 and February 2006.

While EU courts had annulled earlier EC decisions fining this cartel, the ECJ largely rejected the airlines' arguments challenging the EC's evidence, methodology for calculating fines, and the characterization of the conduct as a cartel. SAS Cargo Group was the only airline which succeeded in having its fine lowered based upon a mistake in the fining methodology.

Companies should note that EU competition authorities actively pursue cartel conduct, and that fines may be upheld by the courts even years after the conduct occurred. Vigilance over pricing coordination and compliance programs remains critical to mitigating enforcement risk.

Romania Fines Automotive Companies for No-Poach Agreement
On January 12, 2026, the Romanian Competition Council (RCC) announced that it fined eight companies a total of 163.71 million lei (approximately €32.15 million) for allegedly participating in a "no-poach" agreement that restricted competition in the labor market for specialized automotive and engineering staff in Romania.

The RCC investigation found that the companies, including Automobile-Dacia and Renault Technologie Roumanie, along with Alten Si-Techno Romania, Akkodis Romania, Bertrandt Engineering Technologies Romania, Expleo Romania, FEV ECE Automotive, and Segula Technologies Romania, agreed not to compete for recruitment and hiring of specialized personnel and not to recruit each other's employees without prior consent. Such "no-poach" arrangements effectively divided the labor market, limited employee mobility, and suppressed competition for workforce talent.

The fines varied by company, with the largest penalties imposed on Automobile-Dacia and Renault Technologie Roumanie. One participant received a reduced sanction under the RCC's leniency program for providing key evidence, and several others benefited from reduced penalties after admitting their involvement.

Companies should be aware that agreements affecting recruitment and workforce mobility can be treated as serious violations of competition law and may attract substantial financial penalties.

Switzerland Investigates Microsoft After Licensing Price Increases
On January 15, 2026, Switzerland's competition authority COMCO launched a preliminary investigation into licensing fees charged by Microsoft in Switzerland, following complaints about significant increases in the prices of Microsoft product licenses, in particular Microsoft 365 used by businesses and government bodies.

The preliminary investigation will assess whether the observed price increases may constitute indications of an unlawful restriction of competition under Switzerland's Cartel Act. COMCO indicated that it may involve the expertise of the Price Supervision Authority as part of its review.

The step underscores that competition authorities are paying closer attention to pricing practices by firms with significant market power, including where changes in licensing fees could restrict competition or harm customers.

Companies should be aware that market conduct by leading firms is subject to close scrutiny by European competition regulators, who frequently investigate practices such as bundling, exclusivity arrangements, pricing strategies, self-preferencing, discriminatory conduct, and other potentially anticompetitive behavior.

Germany Prohibits Amazon Price Control Mechanisms
On February 5, 2026, Germany's Federal Cartel Office (FCO) prohibited Amazon and a European affiliate from engaging in certain price control practices on the Amazon Marketplace in Germany and ordered disgorgement of profits of around €59 million (approximately US$66.7 million) alleged to have been earned through such conduct.

The FCO found that Amazon's mechanisms for influencing the prices charged by independent third-party sellers on its platform could distort competition and confer an unfair advantage given the company's significant market share in online retail. Amazon uses various price control mechanisms to review the prices of Marketplace sellers. If these mechanisms determine that the sellers' prices are too high, the offers in question are either altogether removed from the Marketplace or not displayed in the prominently placed Buy Box. The prohibition bars Amazon from continuing these practices, and the disgorgement order is the FCO's first after a reform introduced the presumption that an infringement leads to economic benefits of at least 1 percent of affected local turnover. Amazon stated it would appeal the decision.

Companies should be aware that market conduct by leading firms is subject to close scrutiny by European competition regulators, who frequently investigate practices such as bundling, exclusivity arrangements, pricing strategies, self-preferencing, discriminatory conduct, and other potentially anticompetitive behavior.

EC Initiates Specification Proceedings Assisting Google's Compliance with Interoperability and Online Search Data Sharing Obligations
On January 27, 2026, the EC opened two sets of specification proceedings to assist Google in complying with specific obligations under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The proceedings formalize the EC's dialogue with Google on how it should implement interoperability requirements for third-party developers on the Android operating system.

The first set of proceedings focuses on "Google's obligation [...] to provide third-party developers with free and effective interoperability with [...] features controlled by Google's Android operating system," especially those used by the company's own artificial intelligence (AI) services. The second set addresses Google's duty "to grant third-party providers of online search engines access to anonymized ranking, query, click and view data." The EC intends to conclude the proceedings within six months and will publish preliminary findings and draft compliance measures, enabling third parties to comment before any formal compliance obligations are adopted.

These specification proceedings signal the EC's proactive approach to clarifying compliance expectations for designated gatekeepers and ensuring effective implementation of the DMA.

Our European team has extensive experience with the DMA and the EC's enforcement practice. We can assist with DMA compliance or assessing third-party intervention opportunities.

EC Declines to Designate Additional Apple Services Under the DMA
On February 5, 2026, the EC announced that it had declined to designate Apple Ads and Apple Maps as Core Platform Services (CPSs) under the DMA, after assessing Apple's notifications and market evidence relating to those services.

Under the DMA, companies that meet certain quantitative and qualitative thresholds for CPSs must notify the EC and, if designated as "gatekeepers," must comply with a range of ex ante obligations designed to safeguard contestability and fairness in digital markets.

The EC emphasized that declining to designate particular Apple services does not relieve the company of the need to comply with the DMA for services already designated or subject to ongoing compliance requirements. The decision reflects the EC's careful application of the DMA's designation criteria, ensuring that regulation is targeted at services that meaningfully affect the internal market.

Our European team has extensive experience with the DMA and the EC's enforcement practice. We can assist with DMA compliance or assessing third-party intervention opportunities.

CMA Consults on Proposed Commitments by Apple, Google Under DMCC
On February 10, 2026, the CMA initiated a consultation on a package of proposed voluntary commitments from Apple and Google designed to improve fairness in app store processes and enhance interoperable access within Apple's mobile operating systems under the UK's Digital Markets, Competition, and Consumers Act (DMCC). The CMA sought views from stakeholders on the proposals ahead of a consultation deadline of March 3, 2026.

The proposed commitments aim to deliver improvements for developers and businesses that rely on the Apple App Store and Google Play Store to distribute their apps. They include measures to ensure that app reviews and app rankings are conducted in "a fair, objective and transparent way and do not discriminate against apps which compete with their own," and that data collected from developers during the review process is safeguarded and not used unfairly. In addition, Apple has proposed commitments to make it easier for developers to request interoperable access to features and functionality within its iOS and iPadOS platforms, giving greater certainty over how they can innovate and deliver services to UK users.

The commitments, if adopted, will take effect from April 1, 2026, and will be underpinned by monitoring and public reporting by the CMA on implementation metrics such as app review outcomes, processing times and interoperability request handling. The CMA has stated that should Apple or Google "fail to implement the commitments effectively," it expects to impose formal conduct requirements. The consultation and proposed commitments are controversial and reflect the CMA's flexible approach under the DMCC's digital markets competition regime.

Our European team has extensive experience with digital markets regulation and the CMA's and EC's enforcement practice. We can assist with compliance under the DMCC, or with assessing opportunities for third party intervention in ongoing proceedings.

France Initiates Inquiry into AI Chatbots
On January 9, 2026, France's competition authority AdlC initiated ex officio inquiries into the competitive functioning of the conversational agents (AI chatbot) sector with a view to issuing an official opinion on competition issues arising from the rapid growth and evolving business models of these tools.

The inquiry builds on the AdlC's earlier work analyzing generative AI and focuses on the downstream segment of the value chain, where conversational agents such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Perplexity, and Microsoft Copilot are deployed. The AdlC will examine how these agents are integrated into broader digital services, how their business models operate, and whether competitive dynamics in related markets raise concerns, particularly in areas such as "agentic commerce," where agents can assist or autonomously transact on behalf of users in ecommerce settings.

As part of its inquiry, the AdlC launched a public consultation, and invited stakeholders to provide input by March 6, 2026, on competition issues in the conversational agents sector, including monetization, partnerships, and evolving roles of these tools. The AdlC plans to issue its opinion later in 2026 based on the inquiry and consultation responses.

Companies active in or affected by the development and deployment of AI chatbots and related services should be aware that the AdlC is expanding scrutiny beyond traditional digital markets into AI-enabled interfaces and ecosystems.

EC Formally Objects to Meta's WhatsApp AI Restrictions, Hints at Possible Interim Measures
On February 9, 2026, the EC issued a formal statement of objections to Meta Platforms regarding restrictions the company has placed on third-party AI assistants' access to its WhatsApp Messenger service. The EC's objections outline its preliminary view that Meta may have breached EU competition rules by denying rival AI providers the ability to interact with users through WhatsApp's Business APIs, effectively favoring Meta's own AI offering and potentially foreclosing competition in the emerging market for AI assistants.

According to the EC, WhatsApp constitutes a critical gateway with very large user numbers and Meta may hold a dominant position in the relevant markets. By restricting third-party AI access while preserving privileged positioning for its own service, the conduct could raise barriers to entry and impair competitors' ability to reach European users. The EC has indicated that, due to the risk of serious and potentially irreversible harm to competition, it is considering imposing interim measures requiring Meta to maintain access for external AI providers while the substantive investigation continues. On February 26, 2026, a commissioner from Italy's competition authority AGCM stated at an antitrust conference that the AGCM would be "happy" to drop its parallel abuse of dominance investigation against Meta should the EC expand the scope of its investigation to cover Meta's conduct in Italy.

Companies should be aware that the Member States' competition authorities have been recently increasing their activities compared to the EC. This may lead to a fragmentation of antitrust enforcement in the EU which would seriously affect companies' compliance and defense efforts.

For more information on the AGCM's parallel investigation in Italy, see our prior European Antitrust Bimonthly Bulletin.

EC Publishes Guidelines on Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR)
On January 9, 2026, the EC published guidelines on the application of the FSR, providing clarity on how financial contributions from non-EU governments to companies operating in the EU may be assessed for their potential distortion of competition.

The guidelines set out the EC's approach to identifying, quantifying, and addressing foreign subsidies in the context of mergers and acquisitions, public procurement, and other market activities. They detail the notification thresholds, the assessment of competitive distortions, and the types of remedies or corrective measures that may be required to restore a level playing field. The EC emphasized that the FSR is forward looking, aiming to ensure that foreign financial support does not undermine competition or investment decisions within the European Economic Area.

Companies should know that the new FSR guidelines do not bring any substantive changes but instead provide welcome clarity on certain key issues.

For more information about the FSR, see the Wilson Sonsini Fact Sheet, EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation.

EC Initiates In-Depth FSR Probe into Chinese Wind Turbine Manufacturer
On February 3, 2026, the EC opened an in-depth investigation under the FSR into a Chinese wind turbine manufacturer, assessing whether financial contributions from the Chinese government could potentially distort competition in the EU. The EC's investigation will examine the size and nature of any subsidies, their impact on competition in the EU internal market, and whether such support provides an undue advantage over EU competitors.

Companies should be aware that the EC has shown an increasing appetite for ex officio investigations under the FSR and take this development into consideration when reviewing their compliance strategies.

CMA Fines Company for Refusing to Respond to Information Request
On February 13, 2026, the CMA fined Euro Car Parks £473,000 (approximately US$0.64 million) for failing to respond to a legally binding information request issued under the DMCC. The CMA found that Euro Car Parks did not provide the requested information in a timely and complete manner by failing to respond to multiple efforts to secure a response over months, only responding once the CMA threatened to impose a fine. The CMA noted that this fine was the first issued under consumer protection powers expanded by the DMCC, but that it was reviewing the information provided and did not have an active investigation against Euro Car Parks. See Wilson Sonsini Alert for more information.

Companies engaged in ecommerce, online marketplaces, and digital sales should urgently review how prices and associated charges are presented to consumers, ensure full transparency of all mandatory fees, and avoid misleading countdown or opt-in tactics, as the CMA's expanded consumer protection regime is now being actively enforced.

EU and UK Sign Competition Cooperation Agreement
On February 25, 2026, the EC announced that the EU and the UK had signed a Competition Cooperation Agreement, establishing a formal framework for collaboration between EU and UK competition authorities.

The agreement provides for the exchange of information, consultation on competition investigations, and coordination in enforcement actions, including merger control, antitrust, and cartel cases. It aims to enhance predictability and reduce the risk of conflicting decisions for businesses operating across the EU and UK markets, while maintaining each jurisdiction's autonomy in applying competition rules.

Clients should be aware that the agreement facilitates closer cooperation between the EC and the CMA, which may lead to more synchronized enforcement, coordinated remedies in cross-border cases, and faster resolution of competition issues affecting pan-European markets. Companies with operations spanning both the EU and UK should consider potential impacts on merger filings, antitrust compliance, and strategic planning.