Sustainability and competition law has been a hotly debated topic. While some competition authorities have dedicated specific guidelines for cooperations among competitors in the name of sustainability, the German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) has been adamant that it will adopt a case-by-case approach and that guidance can only be derived from specific precedents. It has continuously invited companies to bring forward specific cases - and sometimes the president of the FCO, Andreas Mundt, jokingly even questioned whether there was really such a big need for guidance given the low numbers of precedents on which the FCO‘s position was actively requested. Last week, the FCO finally had another chance to provide its assessment and expressed its support for a project introducing a reusable system in the plant trade sector to reduce plastic waste (see press release).

As announced in January, BLOMSTEIN is publishing a series of briefings introducing into European and German legal defence matters. In our last briefing, we have provided some insight into the regulatory framework for the defence industry to produce and sell from the EU.

The cooperation of EU Member States regarding defence and security policy and activities ranks high on the European Union’s agenda. This includes EU Member States’ joint procurement of military and sensitive equipment within the meaning of Directive 2009/81 on procurements in the fields of defence and security. Advantages of such joint procurements to national procedures are manifold, including cost reductions through scale economies, facilitated in-use collaboration due to increased interoperability of material and a strengthening of allies.

This briefing gives an overview over the legal framework of such joint procurements. In practice, EU Member States assign the task of procuring equipment from suppliers (mainly private companies) to a single entity (Executive Entity), which, in turn, conducts the procurement for (the benefit of) all participating EU Member States. Candidates for the role as Executive Entity are, firstly, states – participating EU Member States or third countries – acting as a “lead nation”. However, multinational institutions such as the European Defence Agency (EDA), NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) or Organisation Conjointe de Coopération en Matière d’Armement (OCCAR) can also take on this role.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the hot topic of the moment. Interest in the use of AI systems is growing in both the private and public sectors. The motives are obvious: the hope is to increase the efficiency and speed of decision-making processes, save costs and achieve better results overall.

However, the regulation of AI is still in its early stages. At the end of 2023, the EU Parliament and Council agreed to adopt a regulation to regulate AI systems based on the proposal submitted by the Commission in 2021 (AI Act). It was formally adopted by the EU Parliament on 13 March 2024 and has yet to be adopted by the Council. The AI Regulation enters into force 20 days after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU and will be fully applicable - with some exceptions - 24 months after its entry into force. The AI Act is intended to ensure a reasonable balance between risk and innovation. The needs of citizens, SMEs and start-ups will be particularly taken into account and protected.

In light of the expected AI Act, potential challenges in relation to the procurement of AI systems shall be identified. Questions in the context of direct use of AI in a procurement procedure, e.g. in tenders or tender preparation with the help of AI, are explicitly not addressed.

The following considerations are a continuation in a series of BLOMSTEIN briefings addressing AI-related aspects of public procurement law, competition law, trade/direct investment (FDI) and ESG.

This briefing is the first in a series on the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) that BLOMSTEIN will be publishing over the coming weeks. We will address the key aspects that (in)directly affect businesses both within and outside the EU, explore its interplay with the existing legislation in Germany (LkSG) and examine interactions with other acts recently adopted EU legislation (e.g., EUDR and CSRD) which partially set overlapping obligations.

Did you know that exporting lipstick under the wrong circumstances could get you in serious trouble? As innocent and trivial as they may seem, lipstick and many more so-called fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) are often covered by several export restrictions. As a result, the export of these goods may be subject to authorisation requirements or entirely restricted, with hefty fines and other sanctions associated with non-compliance. In this instalment of our briefing series on FMCG, we highlight how export control law applies to FMCG and what pitfalls you should be wary of.

Earlier this year, the European Commission (Commission) adopted a delegated regulation introducing binding valuation information (BVI) decisions into EU customs legislation. These decisions will complement a proven system for issuing decisions relating to binding origin information (BOI) and binding tariff classification (BTI). The adopted text amends Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 by incorporating BVI decisions and rules for their management. Along the same lines, an amendment of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 is set to follow and introduce electronic data-processing for both BOI and BVI decisions.

As announced in January, BLOMSTEIN is publishing a series of briefings introducing into European and German legal defence matters. In our last briefing, we shared some insight into the Bundestag’s ominous requirement (and its legality) to separately approve any defence procurement with a volume above EUR 25 Mio.

Today’s topic concerns export controls on the defence and arms industry. They are a critical component of national and international security efforts. They involve strict legal frameworks and regulatory mechanisms to ensure that the export of certain goods remains in line with the interests of the nations from which the goods originate. This overview provides an insight into the basic components of the legal framework established in Germany.

In our series of briefings, we recap the key milestones of the DMA implementation, deep dive into the various obligations that gatekeepers are facing, lay out the DMA’s implications for stakeholders who are not (currently) within the direct scope of the legislation and update you on the current status of affairs in the DMA’s implementation.

This time on: Real-time access to gatekeeper data for business users under Article 6(10) DMA.

In our series of briefings, we recap the key milestones of the DMA implementation, deep dive into the various obligations that gatekeepers are facing, lay out the DMA’s implications for stakeholders who are not (currently) within the direct scope of the legislation and update you on the current status of affairs in the DMA’s implementation.

This time we focus on: Regulators’ attempts to tame digital markets worldwide in the wake of DMA.

In our series of briefings, we recap the key milestones of the DMA implementation, deep dive into the various obligations that gatekeepers are facing, lay out the DMA’s implications for stakeholders who are not (currently) within the direct scope of the legislation and update you on the current status of affairs in the DMA’s implementation.

This time we focus on: access to data and services.