Case C-633/16: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 31 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sø- og Handelsretten — Denmark) — Ernst & Young P/S v Konkurrencerådet (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Control of concentrations of undertakings — Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 — Article 7(1) — Implementation of a concentration prior to notification to the European Commission and declaration of compatibility with the common market — Prohibition — Scope — Concept of ‘concentration’ — Termination of a cooperation agreement with a third party by one of the merging undertakings)

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 31 May 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sø- og Handelsretten — Denmark) — Ernst & Young P/S v Konkurrencerådet

(Case C-633/16) ( 1 )

‛(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Control of concentrations of undertakings — Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 — Article 7(1) — Implementation of a concentration prior to notification to the European Commission and declaration of compatibility with the common market — Prohibition — Scope — Concept of ‘concentration’ — Termination of a cooperation agreement with a third party by one of the merging undertakings)’

Referring court

Sø- og Handelsretten

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ernst & Young P/S

Defendant: Konkurrencerådet

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (‘the EC Merger Regulation’) must be interpreted as meaning that a concentration is implemented only by a transaction which, in whole or in part, in fact or in law, contributes to the change in control of the target undertaking. The termination of a cooperation agreement, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, which it is for the referring court to determine, may not be regarded as bringing about the implementation of a concentration, irrespective of whether that termination has produced market effects.

( 1 ) OJ C 46, 13.2.2017.