[mrleiter]

Disclaimer: worked for the Austrian cartel prosecutor:

Such (as in: requiring regulatory approval in general, as I cannot legally speak to this deal specifically) takeover deals are structured with a suspensive condition, pending regulatory approval. Until that condition is met, it remains pending and without effect.

[bijant]

That is my understanding from german cartel law (very similar)as well. However how do you structure a deal to take retroactive actions by regulators into account. I don’t know if there is a set of established best practices there, but I‘m no M&A Attorney so this could well be a solved problem. As much as the Law can bore me at times there frequently are questions such as this that pique my interest again. Saw your recent (6mo ago) ask HN. Did you end up changing careers or stick with the law ? I‘m in a similar situation.

[mrleiter]

As far as my experience goes, you cannot really take retroactive actions into account. It's extremely bothersome for the parties involved, and they usually choose to fight it out over all instances, since untangling a business by force, as you can guess, is detrimental to everything you are doing. Usually the parties know about such risks and price it in (two ways: you register the acquisition and risk it being denied, or you skip the registration and hope that the authorities won't start an action by themselves).

I stuck with law right now, talked to a lot of people. I do work that leaves me enough free time so as to satisfy my other interests, learn more about it, and if after like maybe 1 year I feel confident enough to switch, I'll do it. Right now I'm content with that situation. How about you?