Dem am 23. Juli 2026 veröffentlichten 21. Sanktionspaket der Europäischen Union gegen Russland und Belarus sind Medienberichten zufolge wochenlange, zähe Verhandlungen vorausgegangen. Dabei konnten mehrere Mitgliedstaaten Abschwächungen oder Zugeständnisse zugunsten heimischer Unternehmen durchsetzen. Dennoch beinhaltet das neueste Sanktionspaket die umfangreichsten Sanktionierungen von Personen, Unternehmen und anderen Einrichtungen seit vier Jahren sowie eine Reihe von Verschärfungen der sektoralen Sanktionen. Schwerpunkte bilden Maßnahmen gegen den russischen Finanzsektor, ein neues Instrument zum vollständigen Verbot von Kryptowerte-Dienstleistungen aus Drittländern sowie die Aussetzung der automatischen Anpassung der Ölpreisobergrenze bis zum 15. Juli 2027. Daneben versucht das Paket erneut, die Rechtsposition europäischer Unternehmen gegenüber missbräuchlicher russischer Gerichtsbarkeit zu stärken.

On 22 July 2026, a coalition of European companies and organizations published an open letter calling on the Commission to enforce the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in full and without delay. The letter responds to hesitant enforcement posture, as the signatories see it: under pressure, particularly from the U.S., they accuse the Commission of holding back or delaying action under the DMA. As if reacting on the spot, the Commission announced two non-compliance decisions against Google under the DMA, just the following day imposing total fines of EUR 890 million. However, as sizeable as the fine may seem, it accounts for less than 1% of Alphabet's annual turnover and sits at the lower end of the DMA's sanctioning scale. Thus, instead of proving the signatories right by showing that public enforcement is ongoing, the decisions actually are best proof that political pressure from abroad continues to weigh on the Commission’s decision-making.

We take the opportunity to revisit the DMA's second pillar: private enforcement. Building on our March 2024 briefing, we summarize some rulings that German courts have handed down and shows how private action complements and, in some respects, outpaces the Commission's work in Brussels.

While digital ex ante regulation, such as the DMA, is all the rage lately, traditional cartel and abuse of dominance enforcement in the video games industry is more alive than ever with eye-watering fines for offenders, or remedies aiming to improve market conditions for studios and publishers. For developers, publishers, hardware manufacturers, platform operators, and any other business active in the video games industry, cartel and abuse of dominance prohibitions are not abstract legal theory. They directly shape how games are developed, published, distributed and monetised across the EU. Getting it wrong can mean serious trouble with competition authorities. This briefing zooms in on antitrust basics and their significance for gaming companies active in Europe.

As in previous financing rounds, BLOMSTEIN advised Helsing on its Series E financing, which raised a total of USD 1.8 billion and values the company at USD 18 billion.  

Mobile game developers have long had to pay Apple and Google a 30% commission for every transaction. Under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), this is no longer the case. The DMA as well as the German equivalent (section 19a Act against Restraints of Competition (ARC)) are the weapon that lets Mario defeat Bowser. The aim of the DMA is to hold tech giants accountable regarding how they operate their platforms and to empower smaller players. For video game studios, publishers and consumers, the DMA aims to reduce restrictions, create greater control and, ultimately, a better user experience. Here is what gaming companies are now able to do under the DMA.

On June 30, the Commission published the Guidelines for the application of the Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 (Forced Labor Regulation) which prohibits products made with forced labour from being placed or made available on the EU market or exported from the EU. At the same time, it launched the Forced Labour Single Portal, which will serve as the central access point for information and submissions under the Regulation.

Die Investitionskontrolle wird seit Jahren ausgeweitet. Im Zentrum der Wahrnehmung standen dabei meist das Ergebnis der verwaltungsrechtlichen Prüfung durch das Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWE) – Untersagung, Erlass von Anordnungen oder Freigabe. Weniger im Blick war bislang, dass Verstöße gegen die Stillhaltepflichten während des Prüfverfahrens nicht nur zivilrechtliche, sondern auch strafrechtliche Folgen haben können.

The European gaming industry, like many digital sectors, is currently facing a perfect storm arising from an arguably incomprehensible – some might even say incoherent – patchwork of EU regulatory requirements. Driven by the European Commission’s (Commission) ambition to establish digital sovereignty, the regulatory net has tightened, moving from general data protection (GDPR) to specific technical and behavioural obligations for companies. The following briefing breaks down the key legislation on consumer protection as well as its implications on the European gaming industry.

The steel safeguards are dead, but steel protection lives on. On 30 June 2026, the safeguard measures that have protected European and British steel industries for eight years reach their legal limit. Both jurisdictions unveiled new instruments designed to tackle global steel overcapacity while sidestepping the constraints that apply to safeguards. Similar objective, different architecture. This briefing examines how the EU and UK have reinvented steel protection as from 1 July and what their new approaches reveal about the evolution of trade defence policy.

Unser Düsseldorfer Standort gewinnt zum dritten Quartal 2026 Zuwachs um ein erfahrenes Team: Dr. Katharina Weiner wechselt als Partnerin gemeinsam mit ihrer Associate Stefanie Zenzen von einer internationalen Wirtschaftskanzlei zu uns. Beide verfügen über umfassende Erfahrung in der Beratung nationaler und internationaler Unternehmen sowie der öffentlichen Hand. Das Team stärkt besonders unsere vergaberechtliche Beratung in den Bereichen Healthcare, Defence und regulierte Industrien.