Talk:European Union merger law

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

NPOV

The article fails to acknowledge significant criticisms of EC merger law as applied, (including the use of the clearance process as regulatory extortion). For example, several believe that the EU blocked the GE-Honeywell merger for protectionist reasons, rather than as a matter of sound competition law, given that the EU justified the block on grounds of discredited leverage theories while US authorities approved it.

This seems to have been added. -- Beland 03:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems sort of silly to focus the criticisms on the GE-Honeywell case given that the ECMR 2004 was brought in after this case and overhauled the system. Indeed, the ECMR was proposed to address concerns raised in the wake of that decision and were lauded by U.S. Competition authorities (see: http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/monti-unveils-merger-reform-proposals-based-on-us-model/46333.aspx for example).Connolly15 (talk) 12:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an out of date tag to the criticism section as the criticisms are all date to before the ECMR and a case from 10 years ago. There are modern criticisms - hence the Commission's current review of the merger regulations which may lead to a proposal to reform them, but they have little to do with what is mentioned in this article. Will try to get back to this if I have time.Connolly15 (talk) 13:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was non-admin closure as no controversial debate and unanimous approval. Connolly15 (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

European Community merger law → European Union merger law – Relisted. Favonian (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC) This descriptive title is inaccurate, as the European Community is now referred to as the European Union since the Treaty of Lisbon. Connolly15 (talk) 14:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - seems like a no-brainer to me. – ukexpat (talk) 16:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't think this is a controversial move at all. Green Giant (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Merger Regulation 2004" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Merger Regulation 2004 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 17 § Merger Regulation 2004 until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 23:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]