Previous Page  121 / 522 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 121 / 522 Next Page
Page Background

The Minority Share Transfers within the Framework of

Agreements, Concerted Practices and Decisions that Limit

Competition

Minority share transfers may be subject to examination pursuant to

Art. 4 of the Competition Act, or in relation to investigations and eval-

uations concluded with regard to another transaction (for example, a

cartel agreement) even when the above-mentioned change of control is

not in question. In this regard, the issue that the Competition Authority

pays the utmost attention to is the management structure and represen-

tation.

The role of an undertaking that is also a minority shareholder of its

competitor in the management can be examined because of a possible

coordination between the competitors, facilitation of exchange of

information, and creation of an anti-competitive effect

2

. However,

instead of generalizing, each case must be evaluated separately due to

its unique conditions.

Conclusion

Mergers and acquisitions are subject to evaluation under the

Communiqué, provided that they result in a permanent change of con-

trol. This practice is in parallel with the EU legislation. As per the

Communiqué and the Guidelines, control can be sole, joint, de facto or

de jure, and is described as the ability to make strategic decisions, and

to prevent them from being made. Similarly, holding the majority of

the voting rights, the special rights, and preferences that are condition-

al on holding minority shares, and the power to hold the majority in

general assembly meetings can create de facto and de jure sole control,

as well. The possibility of creating a deadlock situation by blocking

strategic decisions, voting rights, equality in the appointment of deci-

sion-making bodies, and veto rights are the examples of the instru-

ments that constitute joint control.

The change of control by way of minority share transfers attracts

the attention of the Competition Authority since it is likely to cause

COMPETITION LAW

105

2

Please see: Decision dated 13.7.2005, numbered 05-46/668-170 and Decision dated 29.3.2007,

numbered 07-29/268-98.