Mandate

Vinge advises Semantix in connection with the acquisition of Tamarind

June 30, 2010

Vinge has advised Litorina’s portfolio company, Semantix in connection with the acquisition of Tamarind AB, one of Sweden’s leading translation companies providing specialist translation services.

As a result of the acquisition, Semantix has strengthened its position as the leading supplier of specialist language and communication services in the Nordic region. The group has a turnover of more than SEK 300 million and employs approximately 170 people and has more than 6 500 language consultants all over the world.

Semantix’s principal owner is Litorina, a private equity company which focuses on acquiring and developing small and medium sized companies in the Nordic region in co-operation with the management of these companies.

Vinge’s team consisted of responsible partner Johan Winnerblad and associates Joacim Rydergård and Philip Watson.

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