Mandate

Vinge acts for EQT and the subsidiary company ESML Intressenter in connection with the takeover bid for Securitas Direct

November 13, 2007

Vinge is acting for EQT and the subsidiary company, jointly owned by EQT, SäkI AB, Melker Schörling AB and Investment AB Latour, in connection with the public cash offer to the shareholders of Securitas Direct AB. The offer also includes an offer to the holders of subscription options in Securitas Direct AB. Securitas Direct AB is listed on the OMX Nordic Stock Exchange. Vinge assists with stock exchange and corporate advice, financing, and acquisition structuring. The total value of the offer is appr. 9.6 billion kronor.

The Vinge team includes Hans Wibom, Michael Wigge, Ola Sandersson, Christoffer Saidac, Tuula Tallavaara, Dain Nevonen and Martin Hall. Fabian Ekeblad and Louise Salomon assist with the financing and Johan Karlsson and Peter Forsberg assist with the competition filing.

New statute prohibits unfair terms and conditions and practices in conjunction with the purchase of agricultural and food products

The so-called UTP Act prohibits buyers from using certain terms and conditions and practices against suppliers of agricultural and food products. The Swedish Competition Authority exercises supervision and can, among other things, carry out unannounced inspections and order individual to attend formal interviews. In conjunction with violations, sanctions such as injunctions subject to a default fine or a sanction fee of up to one per cent of the buyer’s annual turnover can be imposed. The UTP Act will enter into force on 1 November 2021 and will also be applicable to contracts which are entered into prior to this date.
October 05, 2021

Vinge employs additional antitrust economists to further strengthen its practice

We welcome Adam Löfquist and Carl Widstrand to our EU, Competition & Regulatory practice group.
September 30, 2021

European Commission provides sanctions compliance guidance

The European Commission has recently issued three opinions regarding the interpretation of asset freeze provisions in certain sanctions legislation pertaining to Central African Republic, Ukraine, Libya and Syria. The opinions are also of relevance for other sanctions regimes which provide for the same or similar restrictions. Therefore, their practical relevance goes far beyond the sanctions regimes in the context of which they were issued and they therefore provide for helpful guidance regarding the required thresholds for sanctions compliance generally.
September 20, 2021