Divestments overcome strong competition concerns with pharmaceutical merger
This article is part of the September 2020 edition of our competition law newsletter, focusing on some recent key developments.
On 10 September 2020, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ("ACCC") decided to not oppose Mylan NV’s ("Mylan") proposed merger with Pfizer’s Upjohn Inc division ("Upjohn"), despite concerns that competition in the supply of pharmaceutical products to treat cardiovascular conditions and glaucoma would significantly reduce. The ACCC's competition concerns were resolved by the parties providing court-enforceable undertakings to divest three off-patent branded pharmaceuticals to an ACCC approved buyer.
what you need to know - key takeaways |
---|
|
On 29 July 2019, Mylan and Pfizer Inc. proposed to enter into a transaction, which involved the separation of Upjohn from Pfizer Inc and the merger of Mylan's and Upjohn's businesses into a new combined entity known as Viatris. Mylan and Upjohn are both suppliers of cardiovascular, neurology & pain, psychiatry, urology and ophthalmology pharmaceutical products in Australia.
The ACCC was concerned that the merger would have the effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in the supply of pharmaceutical products used to treat cardiovascular conditions and certain types of glaucoma, to pharmacies and hospitals in Australia.
In particular, the ACCC considered Viatris would become the only supplier of Amlodipine/Atorvastatin molecules for lipid-regulating cardiovascular treatment in Australia, and that there would be insufficient competitive constraints on Viatris' pricing and service levels in the supply of Latanoprost and Latanoprost/Timolol molecules, used in the treatment of glaucoma.
In order to address the ACCC's competition concerns, Mylan and Upjohn offered a court enforceable undertaking under s.87B of the Competition and Consumer Act to divest three of its off-patent branded pharmaceuticals used to treat cardiovascular conditions and glaucoma, to an approved purchaser. The undertaking will result in the creation of a standalone competitor to supply these pharmaceutical products to pharmacies and hospitals in Australia, in competition with the new combined firm, Viatris. An undertaking from Pfizer was also required to support the divestment process, allowing Mylan and Upjohn to transfer or license certain intellectual property rights to the approved purchaser.
The ACCC has since approved Aspen Global Incorporated as the buyer of these divested brands, which will be distributed in Australia by Aspen Pharmacare Australia.
With thanks to Sheenae LeCornu of Ashurst for her contribution.
Contents
- The potential future of EU antitrust rules on vertical agreements - Commission's evaluation
- ECJ rejects power cables appeals on dawn raid powers and successor liability
- Commission fines car parts suppliers €18 million in cartel settlement
- Belgian law on abuse of economic dependence now in force
- Divestments overcome strong competition concerns with pharmaceutical merger
- HealthEngine fined $2.9m for misleading reviews and patient referrals
- France issues first ever deal block - E.Leclerc-Géant Casino local hypermarket deal
- €444m French pharma sector fine for rare collective abuse of a dominance infringement
- Italian broadcasting and audiovisual acquisitions law contrary to EU freedom of establishment principles
- JD Sports and Amazon fined for breach of UK merger control procedural rules
- CMA open letter to the weddings sector
- Enforcement action against four housing developers and advice on leasehold properties
Key Contacts
We bring together lawyers of the highest calibre with the technical knowledge, industry experience and regional know-how to provide the incisive advice our clients need.
Keep up to date
Sign up to receive the latest legal developments, insights and news from Ashurst. By signing up, you agree to receive commercial messages from us. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Sign upThe information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to.
Readers should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.