- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Microsoft appeals against UK preventing Activision Blizzard deal
Microsoft appeals against UK preventing Activision Blizzard deal
The blockbuster contract lies in jeopardy for the time being
The American multinational technology company, Microsoft, has filed an appeal against Britain's decision to block its $69 billion takeover of ‘Call of Duty’ maker Activision Blizzard.
In April, UK’s antitrust regulator, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), vetoed the deal stating that it could hurt competition in the nascent cloud gaming market.
Microsoft has now lodged an appeal with the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), which handles appeals against CMA rulings. CAT makes a judgment on the merits of the CMA decision.
Robin Koch, the communications director of Microsoft stated, "We confirm, we have filed an appeal.”
The CMA's decision to block the biggest-ever deal in gaming drew a furious response. Microsoft maintained it had shaken the confidence in Britain as a destination for tech businesses.
Early this month, the European Union's competition authorities had approved the deal after the accepted remedies were put forward by Microsoft. These were broadly comparable to those it proposed in the UK.
Microsoft has also appealed the US Federal Trade Commission's action seeking to block the deal on the grounds that it would suppress competition. The appeal is not an opportunity for Microsoft to submit new remedies.