Vivendi Charge: EU Gun-Jumping Case, Periods and Penalties

The Vivendi EU gun-jumping case is a European Commission enforcement action accusing Vivendi SE of taking control of Lagardère’s editorial and staffing decisions before regulators approved the merger. The Commission issued a formal Statement of Objections on July 18, 2025, alleging breaches across three separate periods stretching from September 2021 through November 2023, and Vivendi now faces potential fines of up to 10% of its aggregate worldwide turnover. A closed Commission hearing was held on December 10, 2025, and there is no legal deadline for a final decision.

What the Commission Says Vivendi Did

The allegations focus on three Lagardère media properties: the weekly magazine Paris Match, the Sunday newspaper Journal du Dimanche, and the radio station Europe 1. According to the Statement of Objections, Vivendi “closely monitored and regularly intervened” in strategic editorial decisions at the print titles, including covers and articles. The company also allegedly made hiring and firing decisions about journalists at all three outlets and influenced Europe 1‘s programming schedule.¹²

That kind of interference is what EU regulators call gun-jumping. Under the EU Merger Regulation, once a deal is notified, the parties must observe a “standstill obligation” and stay separate until clearance is granted. Exercising “decisive influence” before then implements the merger prematurely, and the Commission treats it as a serious infringement.³

The Commission also suspects that executives at both Vivendi and Lagardère tried to destroy evidence by deleting emails and using the auto-delete function on the encrypted messaging app Signal. Regulators consider that an aggravating circumstance that could push any eventual fine higher.⁴

The Three Periods Covered by the Charges

The Commission’s case is unusual in its reach. Rather than a single window of misconduct, the Statement of Objections covers three distinct periods, each tied to a different provision of the EU Merger Regulation.⁵

The first period runs from September 2021 until Vivendi filed its merger notification on October 24, 2022. The Commission alleges Vivendi began exerting decisive influence over Lagardère during this stretch, before regulators had even been formally told about the deal. This falls under Article 4 of the Merger Regulation, which requires notification before implementation.

The second period covers the review itself, from notification on October 24, 2022, to conditional clearance on June 9, 2023. Vivendi was required to keep Lagardère at arm’s length while the Commission examined the transaction. It allegedly did not. This engages Article 7, the standstill obligation.

The third period runs from conditional clearance on June 9, 2023, to the approval of the divestiture buyers in November 2023. Even after receiving conditional approval, Vivendi could not close the deal until the Commission signed off on the buyers of two assets it was required to sell. During that window as well, the Commission says, Vivendi kept exercising influence over Lagardère’s media outlets. This alleged breach falls under Article 8, which governs conditions attached to a clearance decision.

How the Merger Was Supposed to Work

Vivendi notified the Commission of its planned acquisition of Lagardère in October 2022. The Commission granted conditional approval on June 9, 2023, but attached significant strings: Vivendi had to divest its French publishing business Editis and the celebrity magazine Gala to address competition concerns in book publishing and celebrity press in French-speaking countries.⁵

The Commission also imposed an “upfront buyer” condition. That meant Vivendi could not close the Lagardère merger until the Commission had approved whoever was buying the divested businesses. The Editis buyer was approved on October 31, 2023, and the Gala buyer on November 8, 2023. Only then could Vivendi lawfully implement the takeover.⁵

The gun-jumping charges say Vivendi did not wait.

The Fight Over Personal Phones and Messaging Apps

A parallel legal battle grew out of the investigation and has become important in its own right. On September 19, 2023, the Commission issued binding requests for information to both Vivendi and Lagardère, demanding four years of internal documents. The requests covered emails and messages sent via WhatsApp, SMS, Telegram, and Signal, targeted 15 named individuals, and extended to personal communication devices whenever those devices had been used even once for business.⁶

Both companies challenged the requests before the EU General Court, arguing they violated the right to private life under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Lagardère added that complying would put it in an impossible position under French criminal and employment law. On June 3, 2026, the General Court dismissed both challenges in full.

The Court acknowledged that demanding communications from personal devices is a “serious interference with the right to respect for private life.” But it found the interference justified and proportionate given the safeguards the Commission had built in: the requests were limited to specific people, specific time periods, and predefined search terms, sensitive data would be reviewed in an encrypted virtual data room, and journalistic sources received protections modeled on lawyer-client confidentiality, letting press-card holders review, redact, or withdraw responsive documents.⁶

On the French law argument, the Court held that compliance with a binding EU information request does not violate French criminal law, which punishes only voluntary or fraudulent acts. In pointed language, the Court added that any difficulty Lagardère had retrieving messages from personal devices was “of Lagardère’s own making,” because the company had tolerated employees using personal devices for work without ensuring it could later retrieve the data.⁷

The ruling matters beyond this case. It confirms that EU competition authorities can reach documents on personal phones, tablets, and messaging apps when those devices have been used for business, provided the inquiry is properly scoped. Vivendi has said it will appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union.⁷

Vivendi’s Response

Vivendi has denied the allegations. In its public reaction to the Statement of Objections, the company said the Commission’s findings “do not establish any infringement.”² Vivendi filed a formal written response on October 21, 2025, and attended a closed Commission hearing on December 10, 2025.⁴

What Penalties Vivendi Could Face

If the Commission ultimately finds a breach, Vivendi faces fines of up to 10% of its aggregate worldwide turnover. The notification requirement and the standstill obligation are treated as separate legal duties, and the Court of Justice has confirmed that the Commission may impose separate fines for each breach without violating the prohibition on double punishment. In principle, a single company can be fined for infringing Article 4, Article 7, and Article 8 in the same transaction.³

Recent gun-jumping penalties give some sense of scale. The Commission fined Altice €124.5 million in the Altice/PT Portugal case, later reduced to €115.5 million by the Court of Justice. In Illumina/GRAIL, the Commission imposed €432 million in fines, though that penalty was subsequently annulled on appeal. Smaller gun-jumping fines have ranged from €20 million to €28 million in cases involving Canon, Marine Harvest, and Electrabel.³

The suspected destruction of evidence, if proven, could push any Vivendi fine higher. The Commission has flagged the alleged email deletions and use of Signal’s auto-delete feature as a potential aggravating factor.⁴

Where the Case Goes Next

After the December 2025 hearing, the file returns to the Commission for a final decision. There is no statutory deadline for that decision in gun-jumping proceedings, so the timeline is open. Separately, Vivendi’s appeal against the General Court’s personal-devices ruling is expected to move to the Court of Justice.

1
Agence Europe. Vivendi Group Took Control of Lagardère Too Early
2
Barron’s. EU Accuses Vivendi of Jumping the Gun on Lagardère Deal
3
Chambers and Partners. EU Merger Control Practice Guide
4
MLex. Vivendi Facing EU Hearing Over Lagardère Media Influence Probe
5
European Commission. Vivendi/Lagardère Statement of Objections
6
Court of Justice of the EU. Press Release on Vivendi and Lagardère Judgments
7
Clifford Chance. EU General Court Upholds Commission Sweeping Demand for Messages in Vivendi