Brussels, 15 th December 2009
Mergers: Commission approves proposed acquisition of Ensys by RWE, Capiton and Gothaer
The European Commission has cleared under the EU Merger Regulation the proposed acquisition of joint control of Ensys of Germany by a wholly-owned subsidiary of RWE (Süwag), Capiton AG and Gothaer Versicherungsbank VVaG, all of Germany. RWE is primarily active in the supply of electricity and natural gas. Capiton is a private equity investor and Gothaer is an insurance company. Ensys is active in the trading and retail supply of electricity. After examining the operation, the Commission concluded that the transaction would not significantly impede effective competition in the European Economic Area (EEA) or any substantial part of it.
RWE has European-wide operations and its activities cover products and services related to electricity and gas at essentially every level of the supply chain, ranging from exploration/generation to the supply to end-consumers. Capiton is a private equity investor, primarily investing in medium-size companies in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Gothaer is an insurance company, mainly active in the areas of life, health and pension insurances.
Ensys is a small electricity supplier, active in electricity trading and the retail supply of electricity, mainly to industrial customers. The company is mostly active in Germany, having only some trading activities in other European countries.
The Commission examined the competitive effects of the proposed transaction, notably the horizontal overlaps between RWE's and Ensys's activities in the retail supply and trading of electricity, as well as the vertical link between RWE's wholesale activity and Ensys's retail supply of electricity.
The Commission's investigation found that the proposed merger would not materially alter the competitive conditions in the relevant markets. A sufficient number of competitors would remain able to trade electricity and to provide electricity to end-users. Therefore, the Commission found that the transaction would not give rise to any competition concerns.
More information on the case is available at: