Analysing horizontal agreements under Article 101 TFEU

A key proposition underpinning EU competition law is that competing companies should act independently on markets. In principle, rivalry and competition can be expected to ensure the greatest consumer welfare, the most efficient allocation of resources and, with respect to the EU single market project, help further overall market integration. The European Commission (Commission) and other regulators are therefore wary of any arrangements which might dampen competition or reduce commercial uncertainty that would otherwise exist between competitors.

However, EU competition law recognises that certain 'horizontal' agreements entered into by actual or potential competitors (ie undertakings operating at the same level of the supply chain) can lead to substantial economic benefits—in particular, where they combine complementary activities, skills or assets. Horizontal cooperation can be a means of sharing risk, increasing investments, saving costs, pooling know-how, enhancing variety and product quality and increasing the speed/delivery of innovation—thereby generating benefits for consumers and EU trade, as well as attractive commercial advantages for the companies concerned.

This subtopic reviews the EU competition law considerations relevant to cooperative activities carried out by competitors.

Competition issues

Horizontal agreements

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Competition News

Competition weekly highlights—19 March 2026

This week's edition of Competition weekly highlights includes, from a UK perspective: (1) the CAT makes collective proceedings order granting Vicki Shotbolt permission to commence collective damages action against Valve, (2) the government responds to consultation on proposed reforms to the NSI Act 2021 mandatory notification regime, (3) the CMA publishes letter in response to the Chancellor on pricing pressures and competition in heating oil and road fuel markets, (4) the CMA consults on potential designation of Aldi and Lidl under the Groceries Market Investigation (Controlled Land) Order 2010, (5) the CMA approves slot release agreement in Korean Air/Asiana Airlines merger, and (6) the CMA extends deadline for remedies in Aramark/Entier phase 2 merger investigation. This week's highlights also includes, from an EU perspective: (1) the AG considers Latvian municipality not an ‘undertaking’ under Article 102 TFEU when organising in-house waste management, (2) the AG issues opinion concerning national reference from Italy on binding effect and scope of Euribor cartel findings under Article 101 TFEU, (3) the AG issues opinions in JP Morgan and Crédit Agricole appeals in Euro Interest Rate Derivatives cartel case, (4) the AG’s issues opinion suggesting dismissal of Silgan appeal concerning Commission competence in German metal packaging cartel, (5) the Commission publishes evaluation study to inform revision of Aviation State Aid Guidelines, (6) the Commission adopts new State aid rules to boost the use of more sustainable ways of transport, and (7) the Commission reviews State aid rules for banks in difficulty.

View Competition by content type :

Popular documents