Reform of Regulation 1/2003: what changes could companies face?

Background to the consultation

For over 20 years, Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 (“Regulation 1/2003”) has been the central procedural instrument for enforcing European antitrust and competition law (Articles 101 and 102 TFEU). In view of increasing digitalisation and globalisation, the European Commission (“Commission”) is currently reviewing the regulatory regime. On 10 July 2025, the Commission launched a public consultation as part of the impact assessment for the revision of Regulation 1/2003. The published consultation document summarises the feedback from a total of 73 companies, law firms, associations and other stakeholders and highlights where adjustments are needed and what implications this could have for companies in the future.

The consultation aims to explore options for revising the Regulation 1/2003 and to make antitrust enforcement more efficient and modern. While the existing Regulation 1/2003 has proven its worth in principle, parts of it are no longer considered fully adapted to the digital economy. In particular, data-intensive investigations, more complex business models and parallel proceedings by different competition authorities pose new challenges. The Commission is therefore examining how to speed up proceedings, use resources more efficiently and at the same time ensure legal certainty.

Focus on the Commission’s investigative powers

A key topic of the consultation is the investigative tools available to the Commission. Companies report that requests for information tie up considerable human and financial resources, particularly through collection of extensive data, external legal advice and IT forensics. Short response times and unclear requirements are frequently criticised.

The introduction of evidence preservation orders was also discussed. These could oblige companies to secure specific data. While proponents expect this to lead to greater legal certainty and more efficient investigations, companies fear additional IT costs and administrative burdens.

Digital and partially remote inspections are also a focus. They could reduce travel and business interruptions, but raise questions about data protection, trade secrets and rights of defence. Companies are therefore calling for clear legal safeguards and transparent procedures.

Preservation of stricter national rules

 In connection with the review of Regulation 1/2003, national competition authorities, including the German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt), are advocating to the Commission that stricter national rules should be maintained. In Germany, this concerns section 19a of the Act Against Restraints of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen), which provides for powers of the German Federal Cartel Office if an undertaking of paramount significance for competition across markets behaves abusively. According to the German Federal Cartel Office, the rule is important to ensure effective enforcement of antitrust law at the national level and to address unilateral practices that may not be adequately captured by EU law.

Faster decisions while upholding the rights of defence

Many stakeholders generally support faster competition proceedings. Fixed timetables, clearer procedural structures and greater use of commitments to end proceedings at an early stage have been proposed. At the same time, companies warn of increasing risks from shortened proceedings, especially if rights of defence are restricted. Another point of discussion is about compulsory interviews with company representatives. These could make investigations more efficient but would also entail additional legal risks and costs. Stakeholders therefore emphasise the need for comprehensive protective rights, such as legal representation and protection against self-incrimination.

Many stakeholders are particularly critical of the possibility of interim measures without a prior hearing. They see this as posing considerable risks to the legal certainty and reputation of the companies concerned.

In this context, some national competition authorities, such as the Dutch competition authority (Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets), are promoting greater cooperation between national competition authorities and the Commission. Joint investigative teams, as well as a joint decision at the end of the investigation, would lead to a more efficient distribution of tasks and faster decisions.

Access to files and complaints procedures

According to companies, the increasing volume of data makes access to files increasingly time-consuming and costly. Here, the revision of Regulation 1/2003 could be based on the system of the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”). The DMA grants a selected group of parties to the proceedings an even higher degree of access, provided that sufficient safeguards for sensitive information are in place. At the same time, simplifications to the complaints system are being discussed, such as clearer prioritisation of cases or digitalised submission procedures.

Significance for companies

The consultation highlights a fundamental trend: the EU is striving for faster, more digital and more enforceable competition control. For companies, this is likely to mean more intensive investigations, higher compliance requirements and an increasing importance of structured data management. At the same time, the central challenge remains to reconcile efficiency gains with the rule of law, transparency and effective rights of defence. Companies should therefore examine at an early stage whether their internal processes are prepared for increasingly data-driven antitrust enforcement.