Week Ahead (21 October)

W/C Monday, 21 October – FATF to decide on blacklisting Russia amid Ukraine’s push

This week, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global intergovernmental body responsible for tackling money laundering and terrorism financing, will decide whether to add Russia to its blacklist during its upcoming plenary session scheduled from 21 to 25 October.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the FATF has taken measures to limit Russia's involvement in the organisation, including suspending its membership in February 2023. However, these actions, such as barring Russia from leadership roles and decision-making within the FATF, have been criticised as largely symbolic. Ukraine has long been advocating for stricter measures, including the blacklisting of Russia, which would label the country as a "high-risk" jurisdiction with significant deficiencies in combating money laundering and terrorism financing. On the contrary, Russia’s Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina has dismissed these efforts as politically motivated.

Ukraine has been pushing for Russia’s inclusion on the FATF blacklist for over two years. A June 2024 discussion on the matter was postponed due to a lack of political support. However, with the FATF's October plenary taking place this week, Ukraine is once again pressing for Russia to be blacklisted.

Should Russia be placed on the blacklist, it would join countries like Iran, Myanmar, and North Korea, further isolating it on the global stage. A blacklist status would subject Russian entities to stricter due diligence and higher compliance costs, complicating trade relations and financial activities. Despite existing sanctions from the West, Russia has expanded its trade partnerships with India, China, and several African countries. An addition to FATF’s blacklist could also complicate things for Russia in maintaining these international economic relations.

W/C Monday, 21 October – European Commission likely to announce decision on Watermark’s acquisition of Lebara

This week, the European Commission is likely to announce its decision on whether to allow the Dutch-based Waterland Private Equity to finalise the acquisition of Lebara, a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) group, from its previous owners, Alchemy and Triton.

Lebara is a European mobile virtual network operator providing services in the Netherlands, UK, Germany, France and Denamrk. It has around four million subscribers across Europe, along with operations in Saudi Arabia and Australia and has undergone significant changes in ownership over recent years. The company's previous owners, Alchemy and Triton, are known for opportunistic and distressed investments. In contrast, Waterland is recognised for its long-term, nurturing approach, suggesting that Lebara's current situation has improved since 2017, when it was sold by its former owners to Palmarium, an investor that exacerbated the company’s financial struggles.

In announcing the deal, Wendy McMillan, Partner at Waterland, expressed enthusiasm about the partnership, stating that ’’Lebara has built a strong brand and loyal customer base by providing high-quality mobile telecommunications services at competitive prices’’. Stephen Shurrock, CEO of Lebara, also highlighted the benefits of the partnership stating that it would provide the company  with the resources and strategic support needed to accelerate its growth and enhance its service offerings.

The parties filed a notice of the proposed deal to the European Commission on 23 September. Although the Commission’s deadline for Phase 1 of the deal is on 28 October, a decision could take place as early as this week. 

Monday, 21 October – Ryanair and Aer Lingus to challenge Dublin airport passenger cap in Irish High Court

Today, the Irish High Court will hear urgent applications from Ryanair and Aer Lingus seeking to challenge the Irish Aviation Authority’s (IAA) decision to limit passenger numbers at Dublin Airport for the summer 2025 season.

The IAA, responsible for regulating Dublin Airport’s capacity, announced the cap earlier this month, citing technical, operational, environmental, and local planning constraints. The authority noted that An Bord Pleanála, the national planning appeals board, has imposed an annual limit of 32 million passengers for Dublin Airport, and the 25.2 million cap for the summer season takes this constraint into account. The two Irish airlines are contesting this recently-imposed cap, which restricts the airport to 25.2 million passengers from late March to October 2025. Both Ryanair and Aer Lingus filed their legal documents on Friday and the Court today will consider their applications for permission to proceed with the judicial review. The airlines also intend to request a pause on the enforcement of the passenger cap while their legal challenges are under review.

This summer 2025 cap follows an earlier IAA decision, which limited the airport’s passenger capacity to 14.4 million for the winter 2024 season (from late October 2024 to March 2025). That decision is already subject to legal challenges from Ryanair, Aer Lingus, and the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA), which manages the airport. The winter cap cases are scheduled for a hearing in early December, and the airlines are pushing for the summer cap cases to be heard simultaneously. However, the IAA’s legal counsel, Eoin McCullough, has argued that combining the cases would be “inappropriate,” as the new actions have yet to be formally filed.

Thursday, 24 October – CJEU to rule on European Commission’s appeal in Intel case

On Thursday, the Court of Justice of the EU, the bloc’s higher court, will rule on the European Commission’s bid to overturn a 2022 decision of the General Court which partly annulled a Commission finding against Intel (C-240/22).

The 2022 decision came in May 2009 when the Commission found Intel had engaged in a single and continuous infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement from October 2002 to December 2007. The imposed €1.06 billion fine was a record fee at that time. The Commission contended that Intel implemented a strategy to foreclose its significant competitor, AMD, from the market. The decision claimed that Intel's anti-competitive conduct reduced consumer choice, stifled innovation, and harmed competition.

Intel challenged the decision, leading to a 2014 General Court judgment that upheld the Commission's decision. Intel appealed this decision to the EU’s highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and in 2017 the CJEU upheld Intel’s appeal and referred the case back to the General Court. In January 2022, the General Court ruled on the case for the second time, partially annulling the Commission’s decision primarily due to procedural errors made during the investigation process, prompting the Commission to launch a new probe. In April 2022, the Commission filed an appeal against the 2022 General Court ruling with the CJEU.

In January, the EU Court of Justice Advocate General Laila Medina published her legal opinion on the case, providing her initial assessment of this appeal. Medina found that “the General Court did not commit any error”, recommending  the dismissal of certain aspects of the European Commission's appeal and dealing a potential blow to the bloc’s antitrust regulator.  The Advocate General focused on two of the six points in the appeal, concluding that the Commission's arguments inadequately addressed the failure to prove the foreclosure effect of rebates granted by Intel to HP. She also affirmed that the General Court was correct in ruling that the efficiency regarding rebates offered to Lenovo was not accurate.

Despite its non-binding legal character, her opinion will be certainly taken into account in this week’s ruling. This could potentially deal a blow to the bloc’s antitrust regulator in one of the few pending cases in Commissioner Vestager’s final months at its helm following a series of recent court victories, most notably in Apple’s €13 billion tax case and against Google’s appeal against a €2.4 billion fine.