In the reports from around the world collected in this volume, we continue to see international overlap among the issues and industries attracting government enforcement attention. This year, we read with particular interest the discussions of activity in many jurisdictions regarding digital platform competition issues.

We also continue to see the evolution and refinement of general approaches to competition law enforcement in several jurisdictions. For example, The International Competition Network, which is a group of national and multinational competition authorities, adopted a Framework on Competition Agency Procedures, and 62 agencies have signed on. Mexico adopted 'regulations related to client–attorney privilege protection in the context of antitrust investigations'. Japan has also introduced an 'attorney–client privilege [which] will apply to administrative investigation procedures against' cartels, and the discussion in that chapter of how this privilege will be applied will be of interest to many. The chapter from Belgium discusses that country's newly modified competition law, and in this edition we welcome to the Review a new chapter from Nigeria, which provides an informative overview of that country's new competition law. Before this law was enacted, our authors write, 'Nigeria had no comprehensive competition legislation that dealt with antitrust, abuse of dominant position and merger control issues'.

In the past year, antitrust compliance featured prominently on several enforcers' agendas. In 2019, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) notably focused on encouraging compliance efforts: the agency announced a new policy allowing, under certain conditions, companies to receive credit for antitrust compliance programmes when the DOJ considers criminal charges. Elsewhere, the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission has made efforts in the past year to assist Taiwanese business organisations in their antitrust compliance efforts. Poland implemented an online whistle-blower platform and Brazilian authorities issued a whistle-blower protection ordinance.

The policing of cartels remains a focus of competition agencies around the globe. The chapter from Greece notes an increase in cartel enforcement activity in 2019. Authorities there conducted their largest dawn raid yet, and they have also updated the manner in which they prioritise particular cases. The authors of that chapter note that 'it appears that the [Hellenic Competition Commission] has taken a turn toward more pre-emptive action against cartels, by emphasising dawn raids and ex officio investigations and by acting swiftly on complaints and news publications about price increases in specific sectors'. Portuguese authorities are reported to have imposed their largest fines to date. The contribution from Japan notes an aggregate level of penalties that is higher than in recent years, which, the authors note, is partly attributable 'to the record-breaking surcharge imposed in the asphalt cartel case' there. That country is implementing a revised leniency programme. Meanwhile, the chapter from Mexico notes a decline in the number of leniency applications there.

As noted above, online platforms – and the 'digital economy' more generally – continue to be the subject of regulatory scrutiny, including in Brazil, France, India, Japan, Mexico, Poland and the United States. For example, both United States competition enforcement agencies are investigating large platforms, and the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched a market study of online platforms and digital advertising. Taiwan has also begun to prioritise this area. In addition to platform issues, there have been several other notable developments in the areas of restrictive agreements and dominance. Authorities in Canada concluded an inquiry into several pharmaceutical companies without taking action but 'confirmed that healthcare remains a top enforcement priority'. The United States authorities remained active in this area. In addition, Belgian authorities conducted a dawn raid in the pharmaceutical sector. Several jurisdictions took enforcement actions against resale price maintenance (RPM) practices: the UK's action involved guitars; an action in Poland involved online sales of printers and was the result of a whistle-blower complaint; and Japanese authorities took action against manufacturers of various baby products. China concluded four RPM matters.

Merger review and enforcement activity remains robust. The chapters that follow note activity in many sectors. The chapter from Argentina discusses the Antitrust Commission's new merger control guidelines and the chapters from France and India report on streamlined merger control procedures there.

Once again this year, the chapter from the United Kingdom is particularly informative. In addition to describing a busy year of merger and conduct enforcement activity for the CMA, the chapter discusses the effect of Brexit on the competition enforcement regime there, including the transition period and how competition law may factor into the negotiation of a trade agreement between the UK and the EU. Our contributors discuss the future of the CMA and potential consequences of various possible future scenarios. We will continue to watch with interest to see how competition enforcement in the United Kingdom evolves in the year to come.

Aidan Synnott
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
New York
March 2020