Short Reads

Triple-check merger info to prevent costly fines – or worse

Triple-check merger info to prevent costly fines – or worse

Triple-check merger info to prevent costly fines – or worse

03.06.2021 NL law

Companies should check their merger information for accuracy, truthfulness and completeness before handing it over to the European Commission: providing incorrect or misleading information can lead to significant fines and even to the merger clearance decision being revoked.


Chemicals company Sigma-Aldrich was fined EUR 7.5 million for having provided incorrect or misleading information on three separate occasions during the Commission’s review of its acquisition by Merck. This is the third fine imposed for providing incorrect or misleading merger information since the introduction of the 2004 EU Merger Regulation.

These fines confirm that competition authorities stringently scrutinise and verify the information provided by companies in merger cases and that sanctions for non-compliance can be severe. A useful reminder for companies to ensure they retrieve all relevant information within their business organisation, and triple-check its accuracy before submitting it.

Misleading merger information

In 2015, the European Commission approved Merck’s acquisition of Sigma-Aldrich. The approval was subject to the divestment of certain Sigma-Aldrich assets to address the Commission’s competition concerns in markets for specific laboratory chemicals.

In 2016, a third party pointed out that Sigma-Aldrich had failed to disclose iCap, an innovation project closely connected to the divested business, to the Commission. In 2021, this resulted in the Commission imposing a fine of EUR 7.5 million on Sigma-Aldrich for having committed three distinct violations: failure to discuss the iCap project during the remedy submissions as well as in its replies to two specific requests for information. The Commission found indications that Sigma-Aldrich withheld the information to avoid having to transfer iCap to the purchaser of the divestment business.

Consequences of misleading merger information

Companies can face fines up to 1% of their annual turnover for providing the Commission – either intentionally or negligently – with incorrect or misleading information. In setting the fine for Sigma-Aldrich’s three infringements, the Commission considered the following factors:

  • the importance of providing correct and non-misleading information to safeguard an effective EU merger control system;

  • the fact that the incorrect or misleading information related to an innovation project that was connected to and important for the divestment business;

  • the fact that, due to the innovation project’s secret and sensitive nature, Sigma-Aldrich was the Commission’s only source of relevant information.

This is the third time the Commission has imposed a fine for incorrect or misleading information under the 2004 EU Merger Regulation (see our May 2019 newsletter). Apart from imposing fines, the Commission may also revoke merger clearances if they turn out to be based on incorrect information. So far, however, the Commission has refrained from doing so.


Companies should realise that supplying incorrect or misleading information at any stage of a merger case may have far-reaching consequences. The Commission’s recent fines show it is actively enforcing these procedural mishaps, irrespective of whether they occur in the notification form, a reply to a request for information or in a proposed remedy package.

Other competition authorities have a similar determination towards enforcement, as underlined by the call from the UK CMA, the Australian ACCC and the German Bundeskartellamt for close scrutiny of all documents and data submitted in support of an intended merger’s efficiency claim. According to their joint statement, experience suggests that merging companies tend to overstate their intended merger’s pro-competitive benefits whilst third parties (such as suppliers, competitors or customers) may be reluctant to counter these claims for risk of harming their commercial relationship with the merged company.

Companies are advised to anticipate this potential scepticism over their merger submissions. Pinpointing the right persons within their organisation to retrieve the relevant information, and checking it for accuracy and completeness before submitting it, will go a long way.


This article was published in the Competition Newsletter of June 2021. Other articles in this newsletter:


Related news

24.09.2021 EU law
Digital Law Up(to)date: (1) the download of a software with a permanent licence can constitute a “sale of goods”; (2) alert of the BEUC regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp and its new term of use

Articles - In this blog, we briefly present two interesting news in the field of digital law: (1) a judgment of the CJEU considering that the download of a software with a permanent licence can constitute a “sale of goods”, and (2) an alert of the BEUC regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp and its new terms of use.

Read more

09.09.2021 BE law
Digital Law Up(to)date: (1) Parliamentary initiatives about cyber attacks; (2) ‘Zero tariff’ options before the CJEU; and (3) Council of State, GDPR and encryption

Articles - In this blog, we briefly present three interesting news in the field of digital law: (1) Parliamentary initiatives to tackle cyber attacks (2) "Zero tariff" options and open internet access do not mix! (3) Council of State, GDPR and encryption: validation of a decision of the Flemish Authorities

Read more

26.08.2021 EU law
Facebook/Belgian DPA: Landmark ruling on cross-border enforcement under the GDPR

Short Reads - On 15 June 2021, the CJEU delivered an important judgment on the one-stop-shop mechanism. While the CJEU reinforced that the lead supervisory authority is the sole interlocutor in cross-border processing operations, it also contributed to the effective enforcement of the GDPR by reiterating the conditions under which supervisory authorities other than the lead supervisory authority can bring enforcement actions against such processing operations.

Read more

13.09.2021 NL law
Adopting the new Standard Contractual Clauses to secure international personal data transfers

Short Reads - Recently, the European Commission issued an implementing decision on standard new contractual clauses (“SCCs”) for the transfer of personal data to countries outside the European Economic Area. Organisations need to use the new SCCs from 27 September 2021 and onwards. Transitional periods apply for existing international data transfer agreements. To meet their obligations under the General Data Protection Regulation, organisations need to make the appropriate changes in time.

Read more