The European Commission has released a factual summary of its public consultation regarding the revision of Council Regulation 1/2003, signaling a major shift toward more aggressive investigative tools and streamlined decision-making in antitrust enforcement. The consultation, which closed following 75 submissions from stakeholders including top law firms, business associations, and NGOs, outlines potential new powers such as “preservation orders” and “remote inspections” to modernize the EU’s 20-year-old competition framework.
Investor Implications and Corporate Exposure
For institutional investors, the proposed revisions introduce heightened operational risks and potential increases in “false positives” during investigations. The introduction of preservation orders—legally binding mandates to secure evidence—could impose significant IT and administrative burdens on companies. While the Commission views these as efficiency gains, 13 respondents qualified the cost impact as “negative or very negative”.
Furthermore, the move toward compulsory interviews and remote inspections of digital records suggests a future where regulatory scrutiny is both more frequent and less disruptive to the Commission’s own resources, but potentially more invasive for the target firms.
Legal and Procedural Shifts
A critical point of contention is the reform of interim measures. While 26 respondents favored procedural amendments to speed up enforcement, there is stiff resistance to lowering the substantive legal threshold for such measures. Legal professionals warned that ordering interim measures without a prior hearing—an option explored in the consultation—would represent a “far-reaching limitation of the rights of defence”.
Stakeholder Perspective
The sentiment among corporate legal departments is one of cautious resistance toward increased sanctions. One lawyers’ association noted that members often advise clients against voluntary interviews because they are “less predictable than written submissions”. Regarding the efficiency of the new tools, the report states:
“Respondents flagged that… compulsory interviews are a less effective investigative tool than RFIs and the Commission should use this tool proportionately.”
The Commission is expected to use this feedback to inform its upcoming Impact Assessment.