Mandate

Vinge advises Goodtech ASA in connection with acquisition of E&l Intressenter

August 24, 2010

Vinge has acted as Swedish counsel to Goodtech ASA AS in connection with Goodtech’s merger with E&l Intressenter AB. Goodtech is a technology and engineering group with its head office in Oslo. Following the merger with E&l, Goodtech will have more than 1400 employees and sales in excess of SEK 2 billion. Payment will be made in the form of shares in the buyer which currently amount to a total value of approximately SEK 447 million.

Vinge’s team consisted of partners Christina Kokko, Johan Göthberg and Per Eric Alvsing and associates Johan Cederblad, Per Karlsson, Albert Wållgren, Paul Dali, Ulrich Ziche, Caroline Agholme, Per Westman, Daniel Unger, Anna Adolfsson, Oskar Löthberg and Emil Hedberg. Tax expert Maria Schultzberg and associates Kimmie Johansson and Helena Backlund performed a due diligence regarding tax and VAT matters.

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