Mandate

Vinge advises Vostok New Ventures Ltd

February 25, 2019

Vinge has advised Vostok New Ventures Ltd with capital markets related questions in light of the company’s divestment of its portfolio asset Avito, for in total USD 540 million, equivalent of approximately SEK 4,842 million, as well as in connection with the subsequent split and mandatory redemption program whereby each depository receipt holder (“SDRs”) will receive a cash consideration of SEK 25 per SDR.

In total, the company will redeem approximately 81,000,000 SDRs for a cash consideration amount of approximately SEK 2 billion. 

The redemption procedure was approved by a special general meeting in Vostok New Ventures on 14 February 2019. The redemption SDRs will be traded on Nasdaq Stockholm during the period 22 February – 7 March 2019.

Vinge’s team primarily consisted of Jesper Schönbeck, Nils Fredrik Dehlin, Annika Nyberg Ekenberg, Henrik Wastenson and Emelie Svanberg.
 

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