EU Trends and Developments Contributed by: Nathalie Colin, Maria-Clara Van den Bossche, Florence Frühling and Kevin Xhebexhia, Freshfields LLP
ty rights; and (ii) BIT-based ISDS proceedings expose EU member states to liability. Transposition of the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) refers to abusive civil proceedings weap - onised to silence journalists, activists, NGOs and researchers. In response, the Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of 11 April 2024 (the “Anti-SLAPP Directive”) estab - lishes a harmonised EU framework to protect partici - pants in public debate against manifestly unfounded or abusive claims. Its cross-border safeguards are of direct relevance for the broader European civil enforcement landscape. Protection against third-country judgment Articles 16 and 17 of the Anti-SLAPP Directive provide strong protection against abusive proceedings origi - (2024/1069) Background nating in third states (non-EU jurisdictions): • Article 16 obliges EU member state courts to refuse the recognition and enforcement of a third- country judgment if the underlying proceedings are deemed manifestly unfounded or abusive; and • Article 17 further deters third-state forum shopping by entitling EU-domicile targets of abusive foreign litigation to claim compensation for damages and recover their full legal costs before the courts of their home member state. Implementation in national legislations While EU member states were required to transpose the Anti-SLAPP Directive by 7 May 2026, only nine did so by the deadline (France, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithu - ania, Malta, Romania, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden). Belgium has now joined this group, having enacted its transposition law on 30 May 2026. Most member states missed the transposition deadline and are still in the legislative drafting or parliamentary review stag - es, making the practical application of the Directive’s safeguards uneven for the time being. Implications The Anti-SLAPP Directive introduces an additional layer of control over the recognition and enforcement of third-country judgments within the EU. Its two-core
mechanisms (mandatory refusal of recognition and a right to damages before EU courts) are aimed at deter - ring third-country litigation involving public participa - tion when used as an enforcement strategy against EU-based actors. The uneven state of transposition, however, implies that in practice the availability of these protections is fragmented, at least for now. The Anti-SLAPP Directive reflects a recent trend in EU law towards selective enforcement, where access to the EU enforcement market increasingly depends on compliance with core EU policy objectives. EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation Background The EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation or FSR (Reg - ulation (EU) 2022/2560), in force since 12 January 2023 and applicable from 12 July 2023, empowers the European Commission to investigate and address distortions in the EU internal market caused by foreign financial contributions (FFCs) – defined broadly as any form of direct or indirect value transfer from non-EU governments or any public or private entity linked to a non-EU country, including direct grants, state-owned bank loans, tax incentives, R&D funding, government contracts, and grants of exclusive rights without ade - quate remuneration. The FSR operates through three procedural mechanisms: mandatory notification for qualifying M&A transactions, mandatory notification for large EU public tenders, and broad ex officio inves - tigative powers covering subsidies granted up to ten years before the investigation begins. Key developments Two significant developments marked the FSR land - scape in the period covered by this contribution: • First, on 8 January 2026, the European Commis - sion published its long-awaited FSR Guidelines, which offer structured interpretative guidance on the assessment of distortions under Article 4, unduly advantageous tenders under Article 27, the balancing test under Article 6, and the Commis - sion’s call-in powers for below-threshold cases under Articles 21 and 29. The Guidelines confirm a two-step approach to distortion assessment and clarify safe harbours for low-value procurement procedures, subsidies below EUR4 million, and
173 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook