We place considerable emphasis on finding practical solutions in order for our clients to achieve the desired commercial result whilst complying with the rules.
“Accura Advokatpartnerselskab provides excellent support and delivers solid legal advice across merger filings and public procurement matters”
EU and competition - Legal 500, 2019
“Clients are impressed by the extensive expertise of the firm - it has good knowledge of how the competition regulator operates”
Chambers & Partners 2019
“Always accessible, very business-oriented and pragmatic”
EU & Competition - Legal 500, 2018
“They possess great knowledge in the field of public tenders”
“The lawyers are skilled, good at communicating and cost-effective”
“Always accessible and prepared”
EU and competition - Legal 500, 2017
“They are very skilled, specific and thorough, with the right expertise”
Chambers & Partners, 2017
“A ‘quick and precise’ team which shows excellent business acumen and industry knowledge”
EU & Competition - Legal 500, 2016
“Pragmatic and business-minded - a broad understanding of the commercial environment. ”
Competition/European Law, Chambers - 2016
“Proactive, customer-oriented lawyers who bring us up to speed on the latest developments.”
Competition/European Law - Chambers & Partners, 2015
“Top-class, professional team”
Competition/European Law - Chambers & Partners, 2013
“A very talented and skilled team – we would definitely recommend it for competition issues”
Competition/European Law - Chambers Europe, 2012
“This firm is particularly well regarded for its work in public procurement and state aid matters”
Competition/European Law - Chambers Europe, 2012
“Accura's lawyers are always available and quickly familiarise themselves with the issues”
Competition/European Law - Chambers Europe, 2010
“The group's knowledge of tenders is excellent and no firm can do a better job in this area”
Competition/European Law - Chambers Europe, 2009
Agreements between competitors often give rise to concerns relating to competition law,
but also distribution agreements, agency agreements, franchise agreements, licence and production agreements as well as strategic cooperation agreements often give rise to competition law issues.
These issues must be handled correctly to avoid non-compliance with competition law.
We assess whether our clients' agreements and business terms are in compliance with the competition rules, and we also assist with the drafting of such documents.
Companies with a dominant market position must pay special attention as such companies are subject to particularly strict competition rules.
As a result, dominant companies do not enjoy the same freedom of choice as other companies when they select their customers and business partners; when they prepare discount and bonus schemes; or when they determine prices and business terms.
We are highly experienced in the provision of advice on whether dominant companies comply with the competition rules, including advice relating to the preparation of discount schemes, cooperation agreements and customer terms.
Moreover, we assist dominant companies in safeguarding their interests in relation to the competition authorities, including the handling of complaints of alleged abuse filed with the competition authorities.
Most countries have rules under which notification of mergers, the setting up of joint ventures and business transfers meeting certain criteria must be made to and/or approved by the competition authorities.
We perform competition law due diligence investigations for clients contemplating an acquisition, a merger or the setting up of a joint venture.
We assess whether the competition authorities in Denmark or internationally must be notified of the transaction, and whether the public authorities are likely to approve the transaction.
We are used to preparing notifications to the competition authorities under considerable time pressure and often in an extensive collaboration with lawyers in other countries if the authorities of more than one country have to be notified of a transaction.
Our team is the co-author of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Merger Control 2019. Accura's experts have contributed with chapter 17 of the Q&A guide. The article describes the rules and practices concerning merger control in Denmark.
Go to article
The article was published in the 2018 edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Merger Control published by Global Legal Group Ltd. in London.
Both the EU and the Danish competition authorities are entitled to carry out dawn raids on Danish companies.
However, the rules governing the powers of public authorities are complicated and not quite identical for the EU and the Danish competition authorities.
A company failing to comply with the formal rules for dawn raids risks incurring separate liability or causing the sanction to be increased.
On the other hand, the public authorities must comply with certain fundamental protection rules.
We have entered into agreements with a number of our clients under which we undertake to be at their disposal if the competition authorities carry out dawn raids. We also assist clients that are accused of non-compliance with the competition rules in safeguarding their interests in relation to the competition authorities, the prosecution service and before the courts.
If a company has made a special effort to ensure that the company and its employees comply with the competition rules, the fine imposed on the company may be reduced even if the conduct of an employee results in the company breaching the competition rules.
Therefore, an increasing number of companies introduce compliance programmes to ensure that all relevant employees are informed of the importance of the competition rules to the performance of their duties. In that way, the company's position on non-compliance is 100 per cent clear.
We advise on the introduction of compliance programmes on the basis of a philosophy that different companies have different needs, and that a compliance programme must, therefore, always be adapted to the special needs and conditions of the individual company.
As a result of the increased focus on the competition rules and the increased level of sanctions in the form of larger fines and the risk imprisonment, more and more companies choose to use the competition rules proactively.
More and more frequently, companies file complaints claiming that their competitors have breached the competition rules, or companies take legal action against each other demanding that agreements concluded in contravention of the rules be held unenforceable, or that damages be awarded due to non-compliance with the rules.
Both the EU and Denmark have introduced special rules on leniency providing that a company or a person assisting in the discovery of cartels may be granted leniency or even be exempted from sanction although the company or person in question has, in fact, participated actively in the cartel's unlawful activities. We advise companies and persons on issues to be considered before filing an application for leniency with the competition authorities.
Moreover, Accura has vast experience with the handling of complaints to the competition authorities and with the use of the competition rules in court cases.
Our team is the co-author of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Competition Litigation 2019. Accura's experts have contributed with chapter 13 of the Q&A guide. The article describes the rules and practices concerning commercial litigation in Denmark.
Go to article
The article was published in the 2019 edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Competition Litigation published by Global Legal Group Ltd. in London.
Accura has extensive understanding of and experience with the EU procurement rules and the rules governing public procurement, public private partnership (PPP) agreements, privatisations and other EU-related issues in general.
We advise public authorities on when they are required to invite tenders or otherwise suspend competition and on how to correctly draft the tender conditions to ensure compliance with the EU procurement rules while, at the same time, creating optimum competition between tenderers.
In other cases, we advise private tenderers on how to ensure in the best possible manner that their tenders are in compliance with the tender conditions.
We also represent contracting authorities and companies in connection with complaints before the Complaints Board for Public Procurement (Klagenævnet for Udbud).
Accura has all the qualifications needed to act as our clients’ legal sparring partner in connection with the preparation and planning of transactions.
Besides M&A-related core services, such as the drafting of confidentiality agreements and letters of intent, we specialise in tax-related structuring and competition and public procurement law.
Both the competition law and the public procurement law is characterised by many rules and restrictions.
To the extent possible, Accura's EU and Competition Team places considerable emphasis on finding practical solutions in order for our clients to achieve the desired commercial result whilst complying with the rules.
We have developed "Accura Competition Compass" providing our clients with an easy and simple overview of whether they breach the competition rules or risk breaching the rules.
Will I, as the company's chief executive officer, get a fine or a prison sentence if my company breaches the competition rules? Do we have to notify the competition authorities if our company acquires a competing company? Is it all right if we grant quantity discounts to our customers? Accura's EU & Competition Team offers advice on the above and many other issues.
We have extensive expertise and experience with the provision of advice to companies, institutions and public authorities on competition law issues. It is very important for us to provide advisory services that can be used in practice, and that satisfy our clients' commercial needs. Both EU competition rules and the Danish Competition Act apply in Denmark, and the two sets of rules are based on the same main principles, i.e. the prohibition against companies' use of anti-competitive agreements, the prohibition against companies' abuse of dominant market positions and a system monitoring that mergers etc. of companies do not significantly impede effective competition.
In recent years, Danish society and the public authorities have strongly increased their focus on whether companies comply with the competition rules, and the sanctions for breaching the competition rules have been tightened considerably.
In Denmark and a number of other countries such as Germany, the UK and the USA, non-compliance with the competition rules may result in imprisonment, whereas non-compliance with the EU competition rules may give rise to a fine of up to 10% of the revenues of the companies involved.
In Denmark, the level of fines is increasing, and there are several examples of non-compliant companies getting million kroner fines, and executive officers being partly responsible for their company's non-compliance getting personal fines running into several thousands of kroner. A further tightening of the level of fines in Denmark has been proposed relating to both companies and persons.
Moreover, companies failing to comply with the competition rules also risk being met by claims from customers or competitors, or that the courts find that important agreements are unenforceable. Finally, adverse publicity in the media may harm the relationship with the company's customers, business partners and other stakeholders.
It is, therefore, natural that companies increase their focus on compliance with the competition rules.