On March 25, 2021, the European Commission (hereinafter, the “Commission”) issued a “comfort letter” on the compliance of the “Matchmaking Event – Towards COVID-19 vaccines upscale production” (hereinafter, the “Matchmaking Event” or the “Event”) with EU competition law.

The pandemic has highlighted tensions and contradictions inherent in a model that is allowing many restaurants to remain open

Con il “New Competition Tool”, la Ue mira a colmare le lacune delle attuali regole di concorrenza europee, consentendo un intervento tempestivo ed efficace nei confronti dei problemi strutturali che caratterizzano alcuni mercati, anche quello digitale. Ecco in cosa consiste il nuovo approccio

On October 12, 2020, the European Commission opened a public consultation to assess whether the objectives of Commission Regulation (EU) No. 461/2010 of May 27, 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector (the “MVBER”) have been achieved.

After the lockdown, for correct management of phases 2 and 3, products such as masks and disinfectants become even more essential in containing and preventing the spread of COVID-19.

For the first time the Italian Competition Authority applied the communication of April 24, 2020, on cooperation agreements in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak. The two cooperation projects concern the joint distribution of surgical masks and a common moratorium scheme on consumer lending.

L'AGCM deve seguire le linee guida indicate nella Comunicazione anche nella valutazione delle forme di cooperazione tra imprese in mercati puramente locali, per i quali l'offerta dall'estero è trascurabile.

During the COVID-19 outbreak the Italian Government expanded its power to veto or impose conditions on transactions involving Italian targets operating in certain sectors (so-called “Golden Power”).

Price gouging cannot constitute per se a breach of the Italian Consumer Code, but it may raise the standard of diligence to discharge firms’ information obligations and aggravate a separate misleading conduct