competitionlaw

The Italian Competition Authority (ICA) has recently started a II-phase investigation into the proposed acquisition of Compagnia Italiana di Navigazione (CIN), a ferry operator, by Moby, another ferry operator and Onorato Partecipazioni (OP), a holding company that jointly controls Moby together with L19, a private equity fund (decision of 28 October 2015, Case C12005 OnoratoPartecipazioni/Moby- Compagnia Italiana di Navigazione ). According to the merging parties, the notified transaction notified would result in the change from sole to joint control over CIN and Moby, two major ferry operators mainly operating ferry links between Sardinia and Continental Italy. OP, together with L19, gained the joint control over Moby and CIN by the merger operation conditionally cleared by the ICA in 2012. By the notified transaction, OP would acquire the sole control over the ferry operators. The qualification of the notified merger submitted by the merging parties was, however, rejected by the

Introduction By a co-marketing agreement two pharmaceutical companies agree to simultaneously and independently sell and market the same drug, though under different trademarks [1] . Though such agreements are commonly relied on within the pharma industry, they can give rise to some competition concerns. In particular, the parties to a co-market agreement may agree to fix the prices for their drugs [2] . The Italian Competition Authority (ICA) has recently examined the effects on competition of a co-marketing agreement in an Article 101 TFEU investigation in the case Arca/Novartis-Italfarmaco [3] . Interestingly, the ICA did not adjudicate on whether the parties breached competition, but closed the proceedings with a commitment decision [4] . The decision is worth reading as it gives an insight into the ICA thinking about the competition impact of co-marketing agreements and which commitments the parties should offer to resolve the competition problems that may arise out of this ty

Recently, in the Case I472 the Italian Competition Authority has opened an Article 101 TFEU investigation targeting two price-fixing agreements allegedly put in practice by 6 firms active in the steel industry. The agreements had as object two steel products used in the building sector, rebar and welded network. The ICA observed that representatives from the parties are members of the Price Committee of the Chamber of Commerce of Brescia. Every 15 days the Committee holds meeting during which the selling prices for the steel products were reported. Such prices had two components: a basic and a so-called extra component depending on the size of the product. Then, the prices were quoted on a table published by the Committee. On the basis of the evidence collected at the premises of the parties and of trade associations, the ICA found out a full correspondence between the ‘extra’ component of the prices charged by the parties and those reported in the Committee’s lists for the pro