Get 40% Off
👀 👁 🧿 All eyes on Biogen, up +4,56% after posting earnings. Our AI picked it in March 2024.
Which stocks will surge next?
Unlock AI-picked Stocks

Fresh M&A blow for telcos as Three/O2 debate reopened

Published 13/07/2023, 08:49
Updated 13/07/2023, 17:22
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: European Union flags flutter outside the European Commission headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, June 5, 2020.  REUTERS/Yves Herman/File Photo

By Foo Yun Chee

BRUSSELS (Reuters) -European telecoms companies faced fresh regulatory uncertainty on Thursday after the EU's top court scrapped a lower tribunal's decision to life a veto on Three UK's 13-billion-pound ($16.9 billion) bid for O2 seven years ago, citing legal errors.

The case is closely watched by the telecoms industry as, although the deal has lapsed, its approval could make it easier for companies to forge mergers that reduce the number of mobile players in a country.

Orange and MasMovil's planned merger of their Spanish operations, currently being investigated by the EU competition enforcer, is one such deal.

Three UK owner Hutchison is also trying to do the same, after last month agreeing a 15 billion pound merger of Three UK with Vodafone (LON:VOD)'s UK business - a deal set to be closely examined by British regulators.

Back in 2016, retired billionaire Li Ka-shing's Hutchinson conglomerate had aimed to become Britain's biggest mobile telecoms network operator by combining Three UK with Telefonica (BME:TEF)'s O2 to better compete against BT (LON:BT)'s EE and Vodafone, but it ran into opposition from EU regulators.

EU antitrust enforcers said that deal, which would have reduced the number of UK mobile players from four to three, could push up prices. Hutchison subsequently challenged the EU veto.

The General Court in its 2020 ruling annulled the EU decision, raising the bar for regulators to block mergers that hinder competition and prompting the European Commission to appeal to the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

The CJEU on Thursday scrapped the General Court ruling and sent the case back to the lower tribunal.

"The General Court must rule once more on the lawfulness of the Commission's prohibition of the acquisition of Telefonica Europe (O2) by Hutchison 3G UK (Three)," CJEU judges said.

"The General Court applied a standard of proof which does not follow from the Merger Regulation, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, and thus made an error in law."

The CJEU also faulted the tribunal for distorting the Commission's decision in several aspects.

EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager underscored the importance of the case, saying "this judgment goes far beyond the specific circumstances and mobile communications sector affected by the Commission's decision".

"Overall, today's judgment validates our approach to merger assessment under the EU Merger Regulation," she said in a statement as she singled out deals that trigger competition concerns even if these do not create or reinforce a company's dominance.

Moody's said the ruling was credit negative for the telecoms industry as it suggests no change in the EU regulator's tough line.

"This means there is likely to be continued intense competition among operators, particularly in markets with four mobile operators, reducing pricing power and weighing on credit quality," the credit ratings agency said in a note.

Telecoms lobbying group ETNO, whose members include Deutsche Telekom (ETR:DTEGn), Orange and Telecom Italia (BIT:TLIT), lamented Thursday's ruling.

"Lack of scale in telecoms remains a major strategic weakness for the EU. Either we address it, or Europe will lose out to others in the race to network virtualization," ETNO Director General Lise Fuhr said in a statement.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

The judgment means a return to the status quo prior to the General Court's 2020 ruling, said Assimakis Komninos, a partner at White & Case.

"The judgment was to be expected. It makes life easier for the Commission. The General Court went a bit too far in its standard of proof required from the Commission. This brings the state of matter back to normal," he said.

"The CJEU though didn’t give the Commission carte blanche either. It is a corrective ruling, based on principles of effectiveness. It is certainly not a disaster for merging parties," Komninos said.

The case is C-376/20 P Commission v CK Telecoms UK Investments.

($1 = 0.7676 pounds)

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.