Trine Osen Bergqvist
Partner
Stockholm
Newsletter
Schjødt Nordic Competition Outlook
Published:
Volume 26 Issue 3
This newsletter highlights significant developments in competition law, FDI and related regulatory areas across Schjødt's core jurisdictions: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the European Union and the United Kingdom. Each issue features a selected highlight from each jurisdiction, examining key enforcement actions, judicial decisions and regulatory initiatives that are shaping the legal landscape.
1. EU – THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND EDPB PUBLISH CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT JOINT GUIDELINES ON THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE DMA AND GDPR
The European Commission and the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) have published over 100 contributions received during their public consultation on draft joint guidelines addressing the interplay between the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The Commission and EDPB are now assessing the submissions, with the final guidelines expected to be adopted in Q4 2026.
The consultation reflects the growing recognition that the DMA and GDPR, while pursuing different regulatory objectives, may in practice apply simultaneously to the same actors and conduct. The DMA targets so-called gatekeepers (large digital platforms that control entire ecosystems) and seeks to ensure contestable and fair digital markets, while the GDPR governs the processing of personal data. Where gatekeeper obligations intersect with data protection requirements, for example, in relation to data combination, consent and interoperability, questions arise as to how the two frameworks should be interpreted and applied in a consistent manner.
Takeaway: The final guidelines are expected to clarify how DMA obligations and GDPR requirements interact in practice, an area that has so far lacked clear authoritative guidance. This will be directly relevant to designated gatekeepers and other companies active in digital markets. Businesses subject to either or both frameworks should follow the finalisation process ahead of the expected adoption of the guidelines in Q4 2026.
2. NORWAY – THE NCA CONSIDERS INTERVENTION IN TELENOR'S ACQUISITION OF GLOBAL CONNECT
The Norwegian Competition Authority (NCA) has issued a Statement of Objections regarding Telenor's proposed acquisition of GlobalConnect's consumer business. The Authority's preliminary assessment is that the transaction would reduce competition in the markets for broadband and TV services in Norway, with potential consequences for consumer choice and pricing.
Telenor is one of the largest operators in the Norwegian telecommunications market, and GlobalConnect is an established provider of broadband and TV services to consumers. According to the NCA's preliminary assessment, the two companies are significant competitors in the relevant markets, and their combination would reduce the competitive pressure that GlobalConnect currently exerts on other market participants. The NCA has also indicated that it does not consider the competitive constraint from remaining market participants to be sufficient to offset the concerns arising from the transaction. The Statement of Objections initiates a process in which Telenor has the opportunity to respond to the NCA's concerns before a final decision is made.
Takeaway: The NCA's Statement of Objections reflects a pattern of increased regulatory attention to concentration in Nordic broadband markets, where both Danish and Swedish competition authorities have recently subjected similar transactions to close scrutiny.
3. SWEDEN – NEW LEGISLATION ON PUBLIC SECTOR SALES ACTIVITIES
The Swedish Government has presented a bill proposing a new Act on Public Sector Sales Activities ("LOS") to address concerns about competition between public entities and private operators. The law is planned to enter into force on 1 August 2026.
Under the current framework in the Competition Act, addressing competition-distorting public sales activities requires a case-by-case court assessment, which has been criticised as inefficient. The proposed LOS would replace this framework with a general prohibition against public entities conducting commercial activities that unduly affect private operators' market opportunities. Unlike the current rules, the new Act would not require a prior court declaration that the activities are unlawful before enforcement action can be taken. The Swedish Competition Authority (SCA) would be empowered to investigate potential breaches and impose administrative fines of up to SEK 20 million. Public entities would also be required to maintain separate accounts for commercial activities and to conduct a formal evaluation of such activities every four years.
Takeaway: The proposed LOS represents a notable shift in how competition between public and private actors is regulated in Sweden. The practical implications will depend in part on how the SCA exercises its new powers once the Act enters into force. The proposed LOS signals a will to level the playing field between public and private actors in Swedish markets.
4. DENMARK – APPEALS TRIBUNAL CONFIRMS COLOPLAST ABUSED ITS DOMINANT POSITION IN THE STOMA CARE MARKET
Denmark's Competition Appeals Tribunal has upheld the Competition Council's 2025 ruling that Coloplast Danmark A/S abused its dominant position in the stoma care market by engaging in so-called "margin squeeze". The Tribunal confirmed that Coloplast sold stoma care products to municipalities at prices significantly lower than those charged to competing wholesalers seeking to stock the same products.
A margin squeeze arises where a vertically integrated dominant undertaking sets its pricing in such a way that equally or more efficient competitors at the downstream level are unable to operate profitably. In this case, the price differential between Coloplast's direct sales to municipalities and its sales to wholesalers was found to have prevented those wholesalers from competing effectively for municipal supply contracts. The case illustrates how margin squeeze concerns can arise in healthcare markets where public procurement is a key feature.
Takeaway: Companies in dominant positions that sell through both direct and indirect channels should be aware that pricing differentials between those channels can attract competition law scrutiny. The decision may be of particular relevance to companies operating in similarly structured markets, where the presence of a major public purchaser creates conditions in which margin squeeze concerns can arise.
