10th edition of Competition Investigations Conference

The tenth edition of the Mayer Brown Competition Investigations Conference, organized in partnership with Concurrences, provided an opportunity to address particularly timely and substantive topics.

Discussions focused notably on recent developments in French case law regarding the attorney-client privilege, the growing importance and sensitivity of personal data in competition investigations, as well as the anticipated revision of Regulation No. 1/2003 and the new investigation powers sought by the European Commission.

In keeping with the tradition of this event, current developments were analyzed by a distinguished panel of speakers. Two sessions were conducted in French and a third one in English, collectively offering a pan-European and international perspective.

Nathalie Jalabert-Doury commented on recent developments together with Vivien Terrien, Vice-President of the French Competition Authority. She also moderated the panel entitled "When a Cartel Investigation emerges from a merger filing and quickly expands: anticipating risks and making appropriate decisions" in which Britt Miller also spoke.

For those who were unable to attend, here are some key takeaways from this year’s edition:

1. What is to be expected from the revision of Regulation 1/2003 as far as dawn raids are concerned? – First, “freezing orders” based on the DMA/DSA experience are on their way and will involve placing custodians under legal holds and/or preserving other data post dawn raid; second, under “remote inspections” the Commission may well attempt to review the "frozen data" from its premises rather than onsite but it is yet uncertain whether it will seek other remote powers.

2. The consequences of a cartel inspection becoming public are such that many companies are calling for stonger requirements for the Commission to have sufficient grounds to order an inspection – Public announcement of dawn raids was once called for by non-raided companies to have a similar chance to go for leniency but damages actions have completely changed the situation. Now, companies sometimes know that they will face many hurdles with investigations being opened and class actions being lodged globally once the Commission’s press release is out. Costs are huge and it is not always the case that the suspicions put forward are subsequently confirmed…

3. Legal privilege and confidentiality for in-house is still very much a minefield, in particular in France – A law has been adopted for the protection of in-house lawyers advice, it has been referred to the Constitutional Court and, should it see the light of day, many investigators are already saying that they will not apply it – based on EU law. In the meantime, the case law on legal privilege is more and more confusing between the defense rights approach of AM&S (1982) and the confidentiality approach of Van Vlaamse Balies and others (2024-2025). Clarification is needed and legal privilege should not be such a thorny issue anymore.

Information : https://www.concurrences.com/en/evenement/sold-out-competition-investigations-6918