07.11.2023 | KPMG Law Insights, KPMG Law Insights

GWB amendment: These interventions threaten after sector inquiries

On April 5, 2023, the German government passed the 11th amendment to the Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB), the so-called Competition Enforcement Act. The draft law is a turning point in antitrust law: serious antitrust measures can also be taken against law-abiding companies. The planned Section 32 f GWB-E provides for a new intervention instrument which, following a sector inquiry, gives the Federal Cartel Office new and significantly more far-reaching powers to put an end to identified competition problems. As an “ultima ratio,” this should even include an unbundling order, i.e., the breakup of a company.

Up to now, sector inquiries have primarily served the Bundeskartellamt to gain in-depth knowledge of markets and resulted in final reports. It can use these findings in procedures. So far, however, it has only been able to take measures if companies violate specific legal requirements or prohibitions. The sector inquiries into rolled asphalt and cement and ready-mix concrete subsequently led to extensive divestments of joint ventures, which were, however, justified on the grounds of violations of the ban on cartels (Section 1 GWB).

Draft amendment to GWB allows direct intervention following sector investigations for the first time, even against law-abiding companies

Section 32 f GWB-E is now intended to give the Federal Cartel Office the power to intervene and draw direct consequences if a sector inquiry reveals that competition has been disrupted. The paradigm shift is that an intervention under Section 32 f GWB-E is not dependent on proof of concrete violations of antitrust law. This means that action can also be taken against companies that are in themselves law-abiding, insofar as in the view of the Office there is a “significant, persistent or repeated disruption of competition in at least one market or across markets.” For the purpose of concretization, Section 32 f ARC provides for factors listed by way of example, some of which are based on the criteria of Section 18 (1) ARC. 3 GWB, but additionally include in particular market results and practices that are detrimental to competition.

While both German and European antitrust law have hitherto been based on the principle that law-abiding companies do not have to fear sanctions, the draft amendment to the ARC leads to a departure from this proven principle. The German government used Great Britain as a model. The reason given for this is that, unlike the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), German antitrust authorities have so far not been able to intervene effectively in cases where competition is disrupted primarily as a result of market structure.

The GWB amendment provides for these remedies

Remedies typically include primarily behavioral or quasi-structural commitments. These include in particular:

  • granting access to data, interfaces, networks or other facilities,
  • Specifications on business relationships between companies in the markets studied and at different market levels,
  • Commitment to establish transparent, non-discriminatory and open norms and standards by companies,
  • Requirements for certain forms of contracts or contractual arrangements, including contractual arrangements for the disclosure of information,
  • the prohibition of unilateral disclosure of information that favors parallel behavior by companies,
  • the organizational separation of corporate or business units.

However, if such measures are not promising, the Federal Cartel Office can order the unbundling of companies as a last resort. Affected companies can be market-dominant companies or those with overriding cross-market significance for competition (“gatekeepers”). In the event of prior clearance under merger control law, however, there is to be a basic ten-year period of protection of legitimate expectations.

To avert these measures, provision is made for affected companies to reach agreement with the Federal Cartel Office on an undertaking. The commitment to be declared binding by the Federal Cartel Office shall, in return, bind the Federal Cartel Office not to make use of the aforementioned measures.

Increased merger control as a further measure following the sector inquiry

Furthermore, as an additional measure following a sector inquiry, the Federal Cartel Office is to be able to require companies to notify relevant mergers for merger control even if the companies involved have only very low sales. This is intended to prevent corporate concentration. It is true that Section 39 a ARC also allows for an obligation to notify a merger below the notification thresholds of Section 39 ARC under the current legal situation. However, the regulation provided for in Section 32 f GWB-E is tightened. In particular, the sales thresholds will be lowered even further.


If the law is passed in this way, sector inquiries will in future be seen as a sign of potential antitrust intervention measures. Companies affected by sector investigations are therefore strongly advised to seek qualified antitrust advice in a timely manner.


Explore #more

14.11.2023 | Press releases

Tax and Law at a glance – New issue of the digital magazine “Talk

“Talk” stands for Tax and Law Compass, because that’s what the digital magazine wants to be: a navigation aid to the legal and tax aspects…

10.11.2023 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft advise Ziemann Holvrieka on the acquisition of Künzel Maschinenbau

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) advised Ziemann Holvrieka GmbH from Ludwigsburg on the acquisition of the majority of shares…

09.11.2023 | KPMG Law Insights

Mantelverordnung: New rules for mineral substitute building materials

On 01.08.2023, a number of laws came into force or were amended with the framework ordinance on the recycling of mineral waste: the ordinances…

08.11.2023 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises Wide Open Agriculture on the acquisition of assets of Prolupin GmbH

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) advised Wide Open Agriculture Limited (WOA) on the agreement to acquire the assets of Prolupin GmbH. The agreement provides…

08.11.2023 | Deal Notifications, Press releases

KPMG Law advises Wide Open Agriculture on the purchase of assets of Prolupin GmbH

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) has advised Wide Open Agriculture Limited (WOA) on the agreement to acquire assets of Prolupin GmbH. The agreement provides…

01.11.2023 |

Guest article in the “Versicherungswirtschaft” on autonomous driving

Autonomous cars are supposed to be the future. For the insurance industry, the development is accompanied by new risks, but also promising market prospects. In…

01.11.2023 | KPMG Law Insights

The MoPeG is coming – Here’s how GbRs with real estate should act now

On January 1, 2024, the German Act on the Modernization of Partnership Law (MoPeG) will come into force. Then the civil law partnership (GbR) has…

31.10.2023 |

Philipp Glock on the use of generative AI in the current issue of Juve Rechtsmarkt

ChatGPT has ushered in a new information age. The same applies to law firms: If you want to keep up, you have to stay on…

25.10.2023 | KPMG Law Insights

Podcast series “KPMG Law on air”: Company pension schemes in times of inflation

In times of inflation, both employers and beneficiaries worry about how the devaluation of money will affect company pension plans (bAV). Pension commitments are generally…

20.10.2023 | Press releases

KPMG Law participates in the German Legal Tech Summit 2023 as a partner

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) will participate in the first German Legal Tech Summit 2023 in Hannover on November 02, 2023. Philipp Glock, partner…


Dr. Gerrit Rixen

Head of Antitrust and Merger Control

Barbarossaplatz 1a
50674 Köln

tel: +49 221 2716891052

© 2023 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.