On 18 July 2024, the current President of the European Commission (“Commission”), Ursula von der Leyen, was reconfirmed by the European Parliament for a second 5-year term. As part of her reconfirmation, President von der Leyen delivered a speech before the European Parliament, complemented by a 30-page program, which lays down the Commission’s political program for the next five years.

A key pillar of the program – “A new plan for Europe’s sustainable prosperity and competitiveness” – has the objective of combining competitiveness and prosperity with the achievement of the European Green Deal goals.

Specifically on competition policy, according to President von der Leyen, a new approach is needed to achieve this objective. This blog post projects where competition policy is likely headed in the 2024-2029 period by commenting on the most relevant paragraphs of the program.

Von der Leyen: “I believe we need a new approach to competition policy, better geared to our common goals and more supportive of companies scaling up in global markets – while always ensuring a level playing field. This should be reflected in the way we assess mergers so that innovation and resilience are fully taken into account. We will ensure competition policy keeps pace with evolving global markets and prevents market concentration from raising prices or lowering the quality of goods or services for consumers. We will look at all of our policies through a security lens.”

  • This statement reaffirms the classic principles underlying competition law, i.e., the focus on ensuring a level playing field, preventing market concentration, and ultimately avoiding a negative impact on prices/quality of goods or services.
  • However, the President’s comments recognize the impact of global dynamics and the need for EU companies to be able to respond to global pressures. In the context of Siemens/Alstom and Lufthansa/ITA, there is growing pressure from EU Member States to allow European champions and this program could signal an openness to that effect.
  • The President also calls for an increased focus on innovation and resilience in the substantive assessment of mergers. This could mean (i) that the Commission will expand its assessment of the impact of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) standards and security, (ii) that the Commission would be open to a greater role of wider efficiency justifications/public interest considerations in merger control and competition law assessments, and/or (iii) that the impact on the overall economic competitiveness of the EU, and the aim of geopolitical de-risking for critical supply chains and technologies, may play an increasingly important role in the assessment of mergers.

Von der Leyen: “We also need to better support firms whose size and financing capacity cannot be compared to large corporations. They are often the target of killer acquisitions from foreign companies seeking to eliminate them as a possible source of future competition.”

  • The President stresses the importance for the Commission of being able to intervene to assess so-called “killer acquisitions”, notably by non-EU companies. In a number of cases, these transactions by larger, established companies, in a number of cases based outside of the EU, were not notifiable due to the target’s relatively small turnover.
  • The President’s comment is likely a reference to the application of Article 22 of the EU Merger Regulation (“EUMR”) and Article 102 TFEU in the context of the Towercast judgment which holds that national competition authorities and courts can review acquisitions under abuse of dominance rules, even if those acquisitions are not notifiable under EU or national merger control laws.
  • Pending the Court of Justice ruling in Illumina/Grail, which will clarify the Commission’s power to review concentrations not meeting the EU merger control thresholds on the basis of Art. 22 EUMR, and given the uncertainties linked with the application of Article 102 TFEU to concentrations (even after the Court of Justice’s judgment in Towercast), this comment by the President suggests that the Commission could seek to achieve this objective even through a legislative initiative, if necessary.
  • The President’s comment also seems to suggest that the Commission would consider using its powers under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation to call-in the notifications of such concentrations, where facilitated by foreign subsidies, even if these would not meet the thresholds for compulsory notification.

Von der Leyen: “Looking ahead, the Clean Industrial Deal must enable us to invest more together in clean and strategic technologies and in energy intensive industries. The future of the clean and cutting-edge tech industry must be made in Europe. This is why I will put forward a new European Competitiveness Fund as part of our proposal for a new and reinforced budget in the next multiannual financial framework. This investment capacity will invest in strategic technologies – from AI to space, clean tech to biotech – to ensure that we develop strategic technologies and manufacture them here in Europe. And it will ensure that we use the power of our budget to leverage and de-risk private investment in our common goals. I will propose a revision of the Public Procurement Directive. This will enable preference to be given to European products in public procurement for certain strategic sectors.”

  • The program suggests the creation of a new “European Competitiveness Fund”, dedicated to the EU industrial policy. This may be a lesser version of the EU Sovereignty Fund aimed at levelling the support capacity throughout the EU, that was announced by the Commission with its Green Deal Industrial Plan (“GDIP”), but rejected by (some) EU Member States.
  • This new fund could replace the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (“STEP”) adopted in February 2024 and repackaging various EU funds to allow EU institutions or EU Member States give more support to large business for establishing production facilities (see our blog post on amended regional aid rules to foster support for strategic technology projects).
  • Instead of having various funds to support the development and manufacturing of strategic technologies, the “European Competitiveness Fund” may simplify access to public funding through a centralised fund.
  • EU Member States with less funding capacity may be able to draw from that fund to grant State aid for the development and manufacturing of strategic technologies, for cohesion purposes (under the Regional Aid Guidelines) and even outside of disadvantaged areas under (i) the “Chips Act” Communication, for the construction of chips manufacturing facilities, or (ii) the “Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework” (“TCTF”), for facilities manufacturing equipment relevant for the transition towards a net-zero economy until the end of 2025 (e.g., batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, heat-pumps, electrolysers, carbon capture usage and storage, as well as key components and critical raw materials to produce such equipment) (see our blog post on this here).

Von der Leyen: “We will start by focusing on the implementation and enforcement of the digital laws adopted during the last mandate. Tech giants must assume responsibility for their enormous systemic power in our society and economy. We have begun the active enforcement of the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act. We will ramp up and intensify our enforcement in the coming mandate. We will support this by tackling challenges with e-commerce platforms to ensure consumers and businesses benefit from a level playing field based on effective customs, tax and safety controls and sustainability standards. Reaching our digital targets and building a true digital single market would be a gamechanger for our productivity and competitiveness.”

  • The Commission aims to intensify the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”) and Digital Services Act (“DSA”) enforcement. Under the DMA, the Commission has currently designated 7 gatekeepers and 24 core platform services and opened 6 investigations for non-compliance with DMA obligations. As stated by the President, the objective is the creation of a “true digital single market.”
  • In its recent ByteDance judgment, the General Court confirmed the Commission’s decision designating ByteDance as a gatekeeper. The judgment also discussed some key concepts of the DMA, which might provide more legal guidance to digital businesses in their assessment of the DMA.

Von der Leyen: “I will make IPCEIs simpler and faster to get financed and off the ground. The first new set of common projects will be proposed in early 2025.”

  • Important Projects of Common European Interest (“IPCEI”) are large cross-border projects financed by EU Member States (at least four) to overcome market failures or social challenges and to create positive spill-over effects for the EU economy.
  • The Commission relies on ad-hoc guidelines to assess IPCEI compliance with State aid provisions and so far authorised ten IPCEIs, involving 22 EU Member States and 247 different companies (see our blog post on this here).
  • Since the authorisation process is still lengthy, new streamlined IPCEI rules, already announced in the GDIP and confirmed in the program, will be very welcome. At the moment, based on the available decisions, 16 months elapse on average between the pre-notification of the projects and their authorisations by the Commission.

Von der Leyen: “The more aggressive posture and unfair economic competition from China, its “no limits” friendship with Russia – and the dynamics of its relationship with Europe – reflect a shift from cooperation to competition.”

  • The President refers to the competition coming from subsidised non-EU companies, against which the Commission appears ready to use the whole toolkit at its disposal. In particular, the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (“FSR”), adopted at the end of 2022, has been pitched by the EU as a key tool to remedy perceived distortions of competition in the EU caused by foreign subsidies (for a complete overview, see our blog).
  • The FSR enforcement has so far led to two public procurement investigations involving Chinese State-owned manufacturers of clean tech (Longi and Shanghai Electric) and rolling stocks (CRRC). No remedies or prohibitions were imposed as those Chinese companies withdrew their bids. In addition, an investigation into the acquisition by e&, majority owned by the UAE government through an Emirates Sovereign Wealth Fund (“SWF”), of a telecom business in Central Europe, and two ex officio investigations into Chinese manufacturers of wind turbines and of security equipment are still ongoing.
  • The FSR, together with trade investigations (such as the anti-subsidy investigation concerning electric vehicles from China) and the relaxation of the parallel EU state aid framework, will likely generate higher trade frictions, especially with China, which is now questioning the legitimacy of the FSR before the WTO. This may complicate non-EU companies’ investments in the EU, in a context where EU State aid rules are being relaxed to foster the EU manufacturing of certain equipment and components, currently sourced overseas.
  • This shift from cooperation to competition may also result in a stricter approach under foreign investment control regimes and may also influence the merger control assessment, allowing the creation of European champions.
Photo of Johan Ysewyn Johan Ysewyn

Johan is widely respected as a highly skilled European competition lawyer, advising on complex competition issues, including on merger control, anti-cartel enforcement, monopolisation cases and other conduct investigations. He acts as co-head of the firm’s Global Competition group and as managing partner of…

Johan is widely respected as a highly skilled European competition lawyer, advising on complex competition issues, including on merger control, anti-cartel enforcement, monopolisation cases and other conduct investigations. He acts as co-head of the firm’s Global Competition group and as managing partner of the Brussels office.

Clients turn to Johan when they need cutting-edge competition and regulatory advice. He has been advising some of the world’s leading companies for over 30 years on their most complex competition issues. Johan is “an exceptional lawyer who is solution-oriented, has a remarkable ability to rapidly understand our business and has excellent reactivity” (Chambers Global).  Johan “attracts considerable praise for his reliable practice, as well as his great energy and insight into cartel proceedings” (Who’s Who Legal). “Johan Ysewyn has a unique understanding of the EC and a very helpful network of connections across Brussels. (…) One of the best European competition lawyers” (Legal 500).

Johan represents clients from around the world in dealings with competition authorities as well as in court litigation. He has in-depth knowledge of regulatory procedures and best practices as well as longstanding relationships with key regulators, in particular at the European Commission. He has also an active advisory practice covering a range of areas of interest to corporates, including the interplay between ESG goals and competition law, the impact of competition law enforcement on digital markets and broad strategic compliance issues.

Johan’s experience spans many industry sectors, with recent experience in telecoms and information technology, media, healthcare, consumer goods, retail, energy and transport. He has advised on several of the most major merger investigations in recent years. In addition, he has represented clients in many conduct investigations.

Johan’s practice also has a strong focus on global and European cartel investigations. He has acted for the immunity applicants in the bitumen and marine hose cartels, and acted for defendants in alleged cartels in financial services, consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, consumer electronics and price benchmarking in the oil sector. He has acted for the European Payments Council in the first European Commission investigation into standardisation agreements in the e-payments sector. Johan has written and lectured extensively on international cartel and leniency-related issues. He co-authors the loose-leaf European Cartel Digest and lectures on cartel law and economics at the Brussels School of Competition.

Johan is also one of the leading experts on EU State aid issues, working both for beneficiaries and governments. He has advised a number of leading banks and governments, as well as represented major European airlines. From the cases that can be publicly disclosed, he has been involved in the Fortis, KBC, Dexia, Arco, Citadele, airBaltic and Riga Airport State aid cases.

Photo of Thomas Barnett Thomas Barnett

Thomas Barnett is a partner in the Washington, DC office and co-chair of the firm’s Antitrust & Competition Law Practice Group. Tom served as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. He headed the Antitrust Division from 2005 to…

Thomas Barnett is a partner in the Washington, DC office and co-chair of the firm’s Antitrust & Competition Law Practice Group. Tom served as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. He headed the Antitrust Division from 2005 to 2008, having previously served in the Division as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Enforcement from 2004 to 2005. He specializes in global antitrust and competition law practice and works closely with the firm’s white collar practice on criminal antitrust enforcement and investigative matters.

During his tenure at the Department of Justice, Tom:

  • Oversaw the review of all mergers investigated by the Division and supervised more than 30 cases filed in federal district court.
  • Was involved in some of the largest and most complicated criminal matters in the Division’s history, including investigations and prosecutions that involved coordination with multiple competition authorities in other jurisdictions.
  • Led an active competition advocacy program that included numerous amicus briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on antitrust issues and comments to a wide range of federal and state agencies.
  • Argued before the U.S. Supreme Court as amicus on behalf of the United States in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly.
  • Testified several times before Congressional committees.
  • Worked with international antitrust authorities throughout the world and served in leadership positions in key international competition organizations, such as chairing the Working Party on International Cooperation and Enforcement of the OECD Competition Committee and serving on the Steering Committee of the International Competition Network.
  • Received the Edmund Randolph Award, the U.S. Department of Justice’s highest honor, for his service in the Division.
  • Prior to 2004, Mr. Barnett was a leader in the firm’s Antitrust & Consumer Law Practice Group. He also served as an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center, teaching a course on antitrust and intellectual property issues in sports in 2001 and 2003, and as a co-teacher of an advanced antitrust seminar at the University of Virginia Law School multiple times between 1991 and 2004.
Photo of Anne Lee Anne Lee

Anne Lee, co-chair of the firm’s global Antitrust and Competition Law Practice Group, advises clients in complex antitrust litigation matters, strategic transactions, and government investigations. She represents clients before the DOJ and FTC on multi-jurisdictional mergers, competitor collaborations, and joint ventures, and she has…

Anne Lee, co-chair of the firm’s global Antitrust and Competition Law Practice Group, advises clients in complex antitrust litigation matters, strategic transactions, and government investigations. She represents clients before the DOJ and FTC on multi-jurisdictional mergers, competitor collaborations, and joint ventures, and she has litigated cases at the trial and appellate levels in both state and federal courts. Anne also provides antitrust counseling on a wide range of business conduct and compliance issues. A recognized leader in the area, Anne has been named to the “40 Under 40” rankings of both The National Law Journal and Global Competition Review.

Photo of Christian Ahlborn Christian Ahlborn

For more than 20 years Christian Ahlborn has been advising multinational corporates, banks and other institutions on all aspects of global competition law, combining an in-depth understanding of the subject with a pragmatic approach.

Christian is qualified in England & Wales and in…

For more than 20 years Christian Ahlborn has been advising multinational corporates, banks and other institutions on all aspects of global competition law, combining an in-depth understanding of the subject with a pragmatic approach.

Christian is qualified in England & Wales and in Germany and is widely recognized as a market-leading competition lawyer. He is also a trained economist. Christian belongs to a small group of antitrust practitioners who can bring both a legal and economic perspective to a case.

Christian advises major corporates, banks and institutions on all areas of global competition law. He has a broad range of experience in EU competition law, particularly in relation to complex M&A, behavioral antitrust work, control of dominance issues and State aid control. He is well-known for extensive work on high-profile matters.

Christian’s experience spans many industry sectors, with particular experience in financial services, IT, fast-moving consumer goods and mining.

During his career Christian has been seconded to the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition and to the Bundeskartellamt. He is also well known on the Brussels market.

Photo of Kevin Coates Kevin Coates

Kevin Coates advises clients on strategic antitrust and other government investigation issues drawing on twenty years of public sector experience in the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission (“DG COMP”) and ten years of private sector experience as in-house counsel and in…

Kevin Coates advises clients on strategic antitrust and other government investigation issues drawing on twenty years of public sector experience in the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission (“DG COMP”) and ten years of private sector experience as in-house counsel and in private practice.

Kevin advises on all aspects of EU, UK and international competition law, including abuse of dominance, cartels and leniency, mergers and compliance, as well as related EU regulations such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA). He has extensive experience in technology, software and e-commerce sectors.

Kevin worked in the Directorate General for Competition (DG COMP) of the European Commission for twenty years, including seven years reporting directly to the Director General, and nearly ten years as a head of unit, latterly as Head of a Cartel Unit. While working for the Director General he advised on case, policy and communications issues, worked closely with the Competition Commissioner and their Cabinet, and was one of the team that produced the Guidance on Enforcement Priorities under Article 102.

Kevin also served as in-house Counsel at AOL Europe where he was responsible for antitrust and regulatory issues for AOL subsidiary companies in the UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands.

He co-wrote the IP and the telecoms and media chapters in Faull & Nikpay’s “EC Law of Competition,” and is the author of “Competition Law and Regulation of Technology Markets” published by Oxford University Press in 2011. He was a Hauser Global Fellow at NYU School of Law in 2009/2010.

Drawing on his substantive antitrust experience in government and private practice, Kevin counsels clients on business-critical issues. He is known for combining a deep knowledge of the law with an ability to communicate clearly and convincingly.

Photo of James Marshall James Marshall

James Marshall advises on all aspects of competition law and foreign direct investment (FDI) screening, with a focus on merger and FDI control, investigations and enforcement, commercial counselling, and abuse of dominance. He has strong experience in the life sciences, energy & infrastructure…

James Marshall advises on all aspects of competition law and foreign direct investment (FDI) screening, with a focus on merger and FDI control, investigations and enforcement, commercial counselling, and abuse of dominance. He has strong experience in the life sciences, energy & infrastructure, digital and technology, financial services, and sports sectors.

James regularly leads cross-border teams to steer clients through both the merger control and FDI aspects of major global deals. Clients turn to James to help them navigate complex global transactions, and to find innovative solutions to antitrust enforcement and counselling matters.

Earlier in his career, James worked with the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), where he helped develop the UK’s antitrust and regulated sector enforcement regimes. He also practiced for several years in the Asia-Pacific region and has experience advising on competition, regulatory, and public policy issues in Asia and the Middle East.

James is a former Chair of the Competition Section Advisory Committee of the Law Society of England and Wales. He is highly recommended by Legal 500 and is recognized as leading adviser by Who’s Who Legal. James is dual qualified in England and Wales, and the Republic of Ireland.

Photo of Sibel Yilmaz Sibel Yilmaz

Sibel Yilmaz advises on all aspects of competition law, foreign investment and foreign subsidies screening, with a focus on the life sciences, technology and private equity sectors.

Sibel has particular expertise in the life sciences sector and has been involved in some of…

Sibel Yilmaz advises on all aspects of competition law, foreign investment and foreign subsidies screening, with a focus on the life sciences, technology and private equity sectors.

Sibel has particular expertise in the life sciences sector and has been involved in some of the industry’s most high profile matters in recent years, including representing Novartis on its $30 billion acquisition of GSK’s oncology business, advising Takeda on its sale of certain respiratory products to AstraZeneca and representing clients in several investigations relating to alleged excessive prices and other non-competitive practices in the life science sector.

Sibel is ranked among the world’s top antitrust practitioners by Global Competition Review, who included her in their most recent 40 Under 40 survey, as well as Chambers Global. She is described as “a brilliant and promising lawyer, who is highly recommended for complex merger work” and “an exceptional talent”, “absolutely a tip for the top.”

Sibel received her LL.M. in Law and Economics from the University of Rotterdam and Master of Law from Stockholm University and is admitted to practice in Belgium and Sweden.

Photo of Ross Evans Ross Evans

Ross Evans is a leading foreign investment controls lawyer, who focuses on helping clients navigate the shifting global landscape of foreign direct investment (FDI) and national security reviews and regulations, and other regimes providing for security and public interest related geopolitical interventions in…

Ross Evans is a leading foreign investment controls lawyer, who focuses on helping clients navigate the shifting global landscape of foreign direct investment (FDI) and national security reviews and regulations, and other regimes providing for security and public interest related geopolitical interventions in corporate, commercial and financial transactions.

His practice covers foreign investment and international trade laws, encompassing FDI, national security and public interest review and approvals, inbound and outbound investment screening, and export control/sanctions matters, alongside related licensing and compliance and internal and regulator-facing investigations.

Ross regularly advises major multinational companies and a broad range of strategic and financial investors. With nearly a decade of global experience managing engagement with UK, EU and international authorities, and a deep understanding of the trade and investment issues connected to critical and strategic assets and technologies, Ross provides strategic and commercial guidance to clients, general counsel and C-suite decision makers, across industries including technology and telecommunications, infrastructure, life sciences, aerospace and defence, engineering, and financial services.

Ross frequently presents on legal developments and trends to industry bodies and trade groups in the United Kingdom and internationally. He has worked in Singapore and Stockholm, and has spent over a year on two separate secondments with a multinational technology company in London and California.

As an elected member of the National Security Committee of techUK, a technology industry trade association, Ross works alongside committee members drawn from the technology and security sector to break down the impact of new law and policy and to advance engagement and understanding between industry and government in the UK. In connection with his expertise in sensitive and emerging technologies, Ross provided industry focused input at the request of the UK Government on drafting secondary legislation and guidance in connection with the UK’s National Security and Investment Act (NSIA).

Photo of Laurie-Anne Grelier Laurie-Anne Grelier

Laurie-Anne Grelier assists global companies, especially Asian multinationals, with navigating complex areas of European competition law, including antitrust and cartel investigations, the clearance of mergers, the structuring of distribution, collaborative and other commercial arrangements, and issues related to abuse of dominant position. Ms.

Laurie-Anne Grelier assists global companies, especially Asian multinationals, with navigating complex areas of European competition law, including antitrust and cartel investigations, the clearance of mergers, the structuring of distribution, collaborative and other commercial arrangements, and issues related to abuse of dominant position. Ms. Grelier also assists these companies in litigation before the European Courts, as well as with state aid and trade matters.

Photo of Horst Henschen Horst Henschen

Horst Henschen has been advising international companies on their significant strategic antitrust and competition matters for over 25 years. He acts for buyers, sellers, and financial investors in merger control proceedings including in Joint Venture scenarios and defending companies against unsolicited takeovers. Horst…

Horst Henschen has been advising international companies on their significant strategic antitrust and competition matters for over 25 years. He acts for buyers, sellers, and financial investors in merger control proceedings including in Joint Venture scenarios and defending companies against unsolicited takeovers. Horst advises companies in significant (international) cartel investigations and on dominance issues.

In addition, Horst has advised numerous investors and target companies in international and German Foreign Direct Investment (“FDI”) proceedings helping in building up the firm’s ex-US FDI initiative.

Horst is a member of the firm’s global antitrust and competition team and heads the firm’s German competition practice. He is part of our cross-office FDI team that works in close cooperation with the firm’s CFIUS colleagues.

Photo of Anna Lubberger Anna Lubberger

Anna Lubberger’s practice focuses on European and German antitrust law. She has significant experience in EU and international merger control matters and has been involved in complex merger reviews. In addition, Anna advises clients in a broad range of antitrust matters, including cartel…

Anna Lubberger’s practice focuses on European and German antitrust law. She has significant experience in EU and international merger control matters and has been involved in complex merger reviews. In addition, Anna advises clients in a broad range of antitrust matters, including cartel investigations, anticompetitive agreements, abusive dominance cases, vertical restraints, antitrust litigation and compliance.

Anna’s experience covers various industries, notably the consumer goods, chemical, pharmaceutical, automotive, digital and sports industries.

Photo of Carole Maczkovics Carole Maczkovics

Carole Maczkovics is a market leader in State aid law, with a robust background in the economic regulation of network industries (energy and transport) and in public contracting (EU subsidies, public procurement, concessions).

Carole has a proven track record of advising public and…

Carole Maczkovics is a market leader in State aid law, with a robust background in the economic regulation of network industries (energy and transport) and in public contracting (EU subsidies, public procurement, concessions).

Carole has a proven track record of advising public and private entities in administrative and judicial proceedings on complex State aid and regulatory matters before the European Commission as well as before the Belgian and European courts. She also advises clients on the application of the EU Foreign Subsidy Regulation (FSR) and UK subsidy control regime.

Carole has published many articles on State aid law and on the FSR, and contributes to conferences and seminars on a regular basis. She is a visiting lecturer at King’s College London on the FSR and at the Brussels School of Competition on the application of regulation and competition law (including State aid) in the railway sector. Carole gives trainings on State aid law at EFE, in Paris. She also acts as Academic Director of the European State aid Law Institute (EStALI).

Photo of Melissa Van Schoorisse Melissa Van Schoorisse

Melissa Van Schoorisse focuses on a wide range of complex antitrust issues, including multi-jurisdictional merger control filings, international and Belgian cartel investigations, state aid matters, and general behavioural advice, counselling and compliance work.

She specializes in the wider music, media, and entertainment sector

Melissa Van Schoorisse focuses on a wide range of complex antitrust issues, including multi-jurisdictional merger control filings, international and Belgian cartel investigations, state aid matters, and general behavioural advice, counselling and compliance work.

She specializes in the wider music, media, and entertainment sector as well as the transport, metals and mining, and the power generation and energy industry. In that context she has advised international and Belgian clients on the potential antitrust issues surrounding renewable or alternative energy sources, the consolidation of the Belgian energy sector, and the value of consumer data sets in merger control cases.

Melissa is well-regarded in the market, with clients praising her for being “very responsive, diligent”, “hands on” and giving “clear guidance.” “She is really good and knows the ins and outs of the BCA. She sees the big picture and the detail.” (Chambers Europe)

Prior to joining Covington, Melissa has gained extensive experience as an associate at two international law firms in Brussels, and as a secondee to the in-house competition team of a multinational oil and gas company in London, dealing with a wide array of vertical issues, cartel investigations, M&A transactions, and compliance training.

Photo of Alessandro Cogoni Alessandro Cogoni

Alessandro Cogoni is an associate in Covington’s competition team. He advises international companies from a wide variety of industries on all aspects of EU competition law, including State aid, foreign subsidies, multi-jurisdictional merger control filings and antitrust investigations.