Concept of Rescue merger provided by the “Glossary of terms used in EU competition policy” (Antitrust and control of concentrations, published in 2002): The concept of the rescue merger, also referred to as 'failing firm defence', enables the Commission to clear a concentration even though a dominant position is created or strengthened in its after-math, provided that there is no causal link between the concentration and the dominant position, that is to say, the merger does not lead to a deterioration of the competitive structure of the market. The Commission has developed the following criteria for the application of the rescue merger concept: (1) the undertaking to be acquired must be ' failing' (that is, it would, in any event, be forced out of the market); (2) there is no alternative buyer who could provide for a less anti-competitive solution; (3) the market share of the acquired under-taking would, in any event, be taken over by the acquiring undertak-ing, or its assets would inevitably exit the market if not taken over by another undertaking. So far, the concept of the rescue merger has been applied rarely.<\/p>\n
(See: Commission decision of 14 December 1993 in Case IV\/M.308 — Kali+Salz (OJ L 186, 21.7.1994, p. 38); Commission decision of 11 July 2001 in Case COMP\/M.2314 — BASF\/Eurodiol\/Pantochim.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Rescue merger in the European Union LawConcept of Rescue merger provided by the "Glossary of terms used in EU competition policy" (Antitrust and control of concentrations, published in 2002): The concept of the rescue merger, also referred to as 'failing firm defence', enables […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2390,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[196,164],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/606"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2390"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=606"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/606\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=606"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=606"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=606"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}