MONTENEGRO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Bisera Andrijasevic and Marija Ksenija Popović, BDK Advokati
Legislative Overhaul of Competition Law in Montenegro Over the past year, competition law in Montenegro has undergone a legislative overhaul that has over - shadowed enforcement practice. Against the back - drop of intensified legislative activity aimed at accel - erating Montenegro’s EU accession process and closing negotiation chapters by the end of 2026, the Montenegrin Parliament adopted a new Competition Act on 25 March 2026, which entered into force on 2 April 2026. What initially started as a set of targeted amendments to the existing framework quickly proved insufficient, resulting in a rather hasty enactment of an entirely new law. The new Competition Act represents a substantial step towards alignment with EU competition law, most notably with Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and Directive (EU) 2019/1 (the “ECN+ Directive”). Full harmonisation with the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR) has not yet been achieved, which suggests that further amendments may follow in the near future. Moreover, the speed with which the Act was adopted increases the likelihood that additional technical cor - rections will be required to ensure complete internal consistency, as well as full harmonisation with the required EU acquis. A notable systemic change is the explicit instruction that Montenegrin competition rules must be interpret - ed in line with EU legal instruments, including EU soft law. The government is obliged to publish an official list of such instruments, together with their authorised translations. The government has already fulfilled this obligation by adopting the Regulation on the List of Competition Rules ( Uredba o Listi pravila konkuren- cije ), published in the Official Gazette of Montenegro No 62/2026. The Regulation formally transposes a range of EU competition soft law instruments into the Montenegrin legal framework. In the area of merger control, this includes the Commission Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, the Commission Notice on a Simpli - fied Treatment for Certain Concentrations, as well as the Guidelines on the Assessment of Horizontal and Non‑Horizontal Mergers. As a result, EU merger control concepts, analytical standards and decisional practice are now expressly embedded in the domes -
tic framework and will directly guide the Agency’s assessment. While the Act introduces significant changes to the investigative powers of the Agency for Protection of Competition (the “Agency”), it does not grant the Agency the power to impose fines, thereby preserv - ing the dual enforcement model involving both the Agency and the courts. This article will focus on the key merger control‑relat - ed changes and their practical implications for busi - nesses active in Montenegro. Removal of the Filing Deadline and a More Streamlined Phase I One of the most welcomed changes in the Monte - negrin merger control regime is the abolition of the 15‑day statutory deadline for notifying a concentra - tion, while maintaining the standstill obligation. This reform provides parties in transactions with greater flexibility in structuring and sequencing deals, without undermining the effectiveness of merger control. This will eliminate the need to submit incomplete notifica - tions merely to comply with the deadline, a practice that often resulted in multiple subsequent supple - ments and delayed the Agency’s assessment from the date of the initial filing. This increased flexibility in filing timing is likely to have a tangible impact on transaction structuring in practice. Parties are no longer compelled to priori - tise speed over completeness and can instead align the timing of the filing with broader transaction mile - stones, including multi‑jurisdictional clearance strat - egies. At the same time, the continued applicability of the standstill obligation requires careful manage - ment of closing timelines, particularly in cross‑border transactions where Montenegro may no longer be the critical jurisdiction. In the absence of a formalised pre-notification procedure, parties may also increas - ingly rely on informal engagement with the Agency to mitigate completeness risks, although the legal status and predictability of such interactions remain limited. In addition, the Act introduces a more structured Phase I review timeline. Concentrations must now be cleared within 30 days of the date on which a com -
418 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook