Cascione’s Antitrust team was recognized as the “Team of the Year” in the Antitrust & Competition category by The Latin American Lawyer Woman Awards 2024.
The award, presented by the Iberian Legal Group (an international institute that publishes the renowned magazine The Latin American Lawyer), seeks to recognize the achievements of the leading women lawyers within Latin America, honoring both private and in house practice.
The publication highlighted that Cascione’s team “provides insightful advice on competition and regulatory matters, offering technically precise guidance” with a “thorough and multidisciplinary approach”, guaranteeing “responsive, business-oriented support, closely attuned to clients’ needs”.
We greatly appreciate the trust and support of our clients!
The Superintendence-General (“SG”) of the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (“CADE”) has opened three new administrative proceedings to investigate complaints about transactions involving the acquisition of AI development startups by big tech companies.
CADE’s actions seek to determine whether these acquisitions may require antitrust scrutiny by CADE to assess potential competitive impacts, even if the mandatory notification thresholds are not met. These cases were identified by CADE based on press releases published by the media and by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), UK’s antitrust authority.
CADE’s SG has opened an administrative proceeding to investigate alleged antitrust violations involving the market for advertising rights within football championships in Brazil.
According to CADE, two companies and three individuals signed allegedly illegal agreements aiming at allocating private bidding processes. In addition to bid suppression rules, the agreements allegedly (i) established non-compete rules as regards the offer and production of 3D Carpets (a type of advertising tool); and (ii) restricted the use a production process that was no longer protected by a patent.
CADE has started an investigation on the alleged exchange of competitively sensitive information among vehicle manufacturers. CADE has pointed out 6 companies and 23 individuals as participants in the anticompetitive exchange, which is said to have lasted between 1990 and 2017.
According to CADE, the manufacturers shared competitively sensitive information to coordinate their Research and Development (R&D) activities. The information exchange was supposedly carried out via thematic working groups, organized through frequent meetings held at each of the involved companies’ headquarters on a rotational basis.
This is Brazil’s first antitrust investigation regarding an alleged collusion to restrict innovation among competitors.
In August 2024, CADE’s Tribunal convicted, by majority of votes, 19 defendants for allegedly participating in a cartel involving the Brazilian market for orthoses, prostheses, and special medical materials (“OPMEs”). Commissioner Gustavo Augusto and former Commissioner Lenisa Prado casted dissenting votes. The fines imposed exceed R$ 100 million in total value.
One of the main points of dissent was the legality of collective bargaining practices conducted by a trade association aiming to get (i) tax breaks and exemptions for OPMEs, and (ii) price adjustments concerning the Unified Health System (SUS). The Tribunal’s majority ruled that the trade association had exceeded its legitimate purpose and engaged in the unlawful practice of “influencing uniform conduct”, since it allegedly engaged in discussions between competitors to fix how much of the tax exemption would be passed onto the products’ price, and subsequently suggested to the market participants that the agreed parameter should be adopted.
As analyzed by Commissioner Victor Oliveira Fernandes and ratified by CADE’s President Alexandre Cordeiro: “From the moment the association discussed the level of pass-through that will be applied on the product’s price as a result of the tax benefit, we clearly have an instance of influencing uniform conduct.”
CADE’s Tribunal unanimously fined a real estate council in BRL 300,000 for allegedly enforcing uniform minimum pricing practices for broker’s services.
According to CADE’s investigation, the counsel had published minimum pricing tables on its website that, despite being titled “Suggested Price Table”, implied mandatory compliance. Moreover, CADE found that the entity’s ethics code established sanctions against brokers for non-compliance, and that it had shared in its website contracts templates that included fixed prices, which further reinforced the perception that the price tables were mandatory.
Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that labeling the price table as “suggested” could not prevent its capability to restrict competition by illegally influencing the market to adopt a uniform pricing practice.
In recent months, the Foreign Trade Secretariat (“SECEX”) initiated antidumping investigations regarding the following exports to Brazil:
In recent months, the Foreign Trade Secretariat (“SECEX”) initiated antidumping investigations regarding the following exports to Brazil:
Lastly, SECEX has: (i) concluded the review of the antidumping duty applied to imports of grinding balls from India, without extending the measure; (ii) issued a preliminary affirmative determination of dumping and injury to the domestic industry regarding exports of phthalic anhydride from China, applying provisional duties; (iii) issued a preliminary affirmative determination of dumping and injury to the domestic industry regarding exports of polyester polyols from China and the United States, without recommending the application of provisional duties; and (iv) initiated an individual dumping margin investigation for a new producer/exporter and an investigation to determine individual countervailing duties as regards exports of PET from India.
Denise Junqueira
djunqueira@cascione.com.br
Brazilian Competition Case Law, Trade & Trends | September 2024