Can the Ukrainian business be excluded from a global transaction to avoid the need for Ukrainian merger clearance?

Legal alerts

Can the Ukrainian business be excluded from a global transaction to avoid the need for Ukrainian merger clearance?

Recently, the Ukrainian competition watchdog has made it clear that the answer is no.

On 22 June 2023, the regulator imposed a hefty fine (around EUR 623,375) on Cheplapharm Arzneimittel for violating the standstill obligation and closing the acquisition of the Valcyte® business from Hoffmann-La Roche during the Phase II review.

What happened?

In December 2021, the parties asked the regulator to clear the transaction. The regulator launched the Phase II review in January 2022 after finding grounds for prohibiting the deal. During the in-depth transaction analysis, the regulator discovered that the parties had closed the deal on 1 February 2022, carving out the Ukrainian business.

Cheplapharm admitted to formally violating Ukrainian merger control rules in response to the statement of objections. However, they argued the penalties were unwarranted (or should be nominal) because:

  • the transaction excluded the Ukrainian business, resulting in no adverse effect on the relevant markets in Ukraine; and
  • the Ukrainian competition law applies to arrangements that affect or may affect the local competition environment.

Nevertheless, the regulator imposed the fine on Cheplapharm, emphasizing that the carve-out did not create a safe harbour for the parties. The regulator’s jurisdiction over the transaction was established by the fact that the parties hit the local merger control thresholds, and it was irrelevant whether they were not registered or had no direct sales in Ukraine, or the transaction did not have any impact on the Ukrainian markets.

Key takeaways

This case highlights that:

  • the carve-out arrangements designed to avoid local merger clearance are ineffective in Ukraine;
  • the regulator closely monitors public information to ensure compliance with the Ukrainian merger control rules; and
  • closing a foreign-to-foreign transaction with no or little Ukrainian nexus will still be subject to local merger clearance if the parties hit the relevant jurisdictional thresholds.

How to mitigate the potential exposure?

In our experience, if the parties are willing to take the risk and close a transaction before clearing it in Ukraine by carving out the local business, they must communicate this decision to the regulator reasonably in advance and provide sufficient evidence showing how exactly the carve-out would work from a practical perspective.

While it may not guarantee complete protection against fines, taking this step can certainly minimise them.

Feel free to reach out if you have further questions about this matter or any other antitrust inquiries.








Related practices

Posted on July 31, 2023

Ukrainian Government approves regulation of state support for investment projects with significant investments

On 26 April 2024, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (“Government”) approved the Procedure for Using Funds from the State Budget to Provide State Support for the Implementation of Investment Projects Involving Significant Investments (“Budget Procedure”). BackgroundThe incentives for investment projects with significant investments (“Investment Project”) were initially introduced by the Law of Ukraine “On […]

Posted on May 29, 2024

Labour law changes: impact of EU Directive on M&A procedures

On 15 May 2024, amendments to the Labour Code of Ukraine came into effect aiming to regulate the rights and obligations of parties in labour relations during a change of control over business. The Ukrainian parliament adopted such amendments to align Ukrainian legislation with EU Directive 2001/23/EC, dated 12 March 2001. Definition of the “transfer […]

Posted on May 28, 2024
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Search results: