The Belgian Competition Authority (“BCA”) issued its first decision based on the prohibition on the abuse of economic dependency in Belgian competition law. The decision concerns the relationship between the Raffinerie Tirlemontoise – a subsidiary of the German company Südzucker – and its suppliers, the Belgian sugar beet growers. The BCA investigated whether certain contractual clauses between the Raffinerie and the growers placed the growers at an unreasonable disadvantage. The investigation resulted in binding commitments, in which the Raffinerie Tirlemontoise agreed to greater transparency, annual negotiations, and the removal or amendment of problematic clauses. With this decision, the BCA is taking an important step in enforcing the prohibition on the abuse of economic dependency.
Article IV.2/1 of the CEL applied for the first time
The prohibition on the abuse of economic dependency was introduced into Belgian competition law by the Act of 4 April 2019, which inserted Article IV.2/1 into the Code of Economic Law (CEL).
The provision prohibits any undertaking from abusing a position of economic dependency of one or more other undertakings where this may affect competition on (part of) the Belgian market. Unlike the prohibition on abuse of a dominant position (Article IV.2 CEL), the "abusing undertaking" does not need to be dominant. Article IV.2/1 CEL targets situations where an undertaking uses its particular market position to impose, in particular, unfair conditions on one or more trading partners who have no reasonable equivalent alternative, provided that competition is likely to be affected.
Although this provision has been part of the BCA’s enforcement toolkit for more than six years, it had never been applied in practice. That has now changed.
The Investigation in the sugar beet sector
The BCA’s investigation focused on the contractual framework governing the relationship between the Raffinerie Tirlemontoise and its sugar beet growers. On 5 February 2026, the BCA sent a statement of objections to the Raffinerie Tirlemontoise and its parent company, Südzucker. The statement identified several contractual provisions that might constitute an abuse of economic dependency. The BCA focused in particular on clauses relating to the determination of the purchase price of sugar beet and the remuneration for beet pulp, as well as the associated payment terms.
According to the BCA’s analysis, these provisions created a climate of general uncertainty for growers (in particular regarding income prospects), constrained their autonomy in managing agricultural and commercial operations, and disproportionately shifted the commercial risks of the sugar sector onto them.
Commitments declared binding
The Raffinerie Tirlemontoise and Südzucker contested the BCA’s objections but offered commitments to bring the investigation to a close.
Specifically, the Raffinerie Tirlemontoise commits to:
- amend a series of contractual clauses relating mainly to the determination of the purchase price of sugar beet and the remuneration for the beet pulp, as well as to the exceptional adjustment of planned procurement volumes;
- remove a series of contractual clauses relating in particular to the condition that payment of part of the price of the beet be made subject to obligations pertaining to the following harvest year and to the transfer of certain specific costs to the growers; and
- negotiate specific procurement terms annually on this new basis with the growers’ representatives, with a view to achieving a contractual balance following consultations characterised by dialogue, transparency and the effective consideration of the interests of the growers.
On 7 September 2026, the BCA declared these commitments binding and terminated the investigation. The commitments will take effect with the 2027 beet campaign and will remain in force for a minimum period of five years. The full text of the decision will soon be available on the BCA’s website.
Authors:
- Jan Bocken, Managing Partner at Eubelius
- Luca Anna Deruyck, Attorney at Eubelius
