-

Decision on the notified concentration concerning the acquisition by “PIRAEUS BANK S.A.” of sole control over “MIG HOLDINGS S.A.”, in order to determine whether the conditions for the application of Article 6 (4), in conjunction with  paras. 1 and 2 of the same Article and Article 38 (3) of Law 3959/2011 are met, following the Statement of Objections under ref. no. 809/09.02.2024 by the Commissioner-Rapporteur I. Stefatos.

Article 6 (1-2), Article 9 (1) and Article 38 (3) of Law 3959/2011.

Operative part of the Decision

The Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), in Plenary sitting and by open vote, unanimously decided as follows:

1.         It does not find an early implementation of the concentration concerning the acquisition of the de facto sole control by Piraeus Bank over MIG, in breach of Article 9 (1) of Law 3959/2011 prior to the issuance of the HCC Decision No. 815/2023.

2.         It does not find a failure to notify the concentration (gun-jumping) concerning the acquisition of the de facto sole control by Piraeus Bank over MIG, in breach of Article 6 (1) of Law 3959/2011 prior to the issuance of the HCC Decision No. 815/2023.

3.          It does not find that Piraeus Bank provided incomplete and inaccurate information, in breach of Article 38 (3) of Law 3959/2011.

1. “PIRAEUS BANK S.A.”
2. “MIG HOLDINGS S.A.”

According to the HCC, the evidence in the case file shows that, on the one hand, Piraeus Bank was not required to notify the concentration within the meaning of Article 6 (1) of Law 3959/2011 before 09.02.2023, and, on the other, it did not proceed with an early implementation of the concentration under examination, in breach of Article 9 (1) (a) of Law 3959/2011, by acquiring a de facto sole control over MIG prior to the issuance of the relevant HCC Decision no. 815/2023, approving the acquisition of MIG by Piraeus Bank because the latter’s minority stake in MIG during the period in question did not result from its own business policy, as it had no strategic or investment interest in MIG, nor did it intend to take over the management and administration of its affairs, but only an interest in managing and limiting its financial exposure to MIG, and it never had the possibility to appoint all or the majority of the members of the Board of Directors, as is the case in situations of a de facto sole control.

In so far as it is not established that Piraeus Bank exercised a de jure or de facto sole control over MIG prior to February 9, 2023, and that, therefore, it proceeded with the relevant notification in a timely manner on February 13, 2023, it does not appear that, by claiming, in 2017, that it did not exercise a de facto sole control over MIG, it provided incomplete or misleading information in the context of the investigation conducted by the HCC prior to the issuance of its Decision no. 658/2018, which approved the concentration concerning the acquisition of sole control by ATTICA GROUP over HELLENIC SEAWAYS.