Vinge Logotype
Svenska English 18D7E0DE-2035-40AE-A740-8F45A358A8F4 Login
  1. Home
  2. Mandates
  3. Vinge has advised Lifco AB (publ) (1)
Mandate

Vinge has advised Lifco AB (publ)

February 13, 2017

Vinge has advised Lifco AB (publ) and its wholly owned subsidiary Sorb Industri AB in connection with its acquisition of Haglöf Sweden AB, a world leading supplier of professional forest inventory instruments. Lifco acquires and develops market-leading niche businesses with the potential to deliver sustainable profit growth and robust cash flows. The Group has three business areas: Dental, Demolition & Tools and Systems Solutions. The Lifco Group comprises 133 companies in 28 countries. In 2015 the Group reported EBITA of MSEK 1,186 on sales of around BSEK 7.9, with an EBITA margin of 15.0%.

The Vinge team consists of partner Erik Gabrielson together with associate Mattias Sköld and, inter alia, Mathias Lindquist, Ida Christensson, Kristoffer Franzkeit and Hampus Wikerstål.

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