Abstract
The decision making process of regulators concerning mergers of competition is the main ex ante tool to regulate competition (in other words - to ensure the optimal structure on the market) in order to protect the market, as both abuse of dominant position and cartel law mainly deal with the harm being already done. The aim of this paper is to find out and further describe the key parts of this process, i.e., what is able to influence the decision-making process (and how) and compare what may be stronger arguments made by the competitors in terms of getting the respective merger successfully through the decision making procedure.
This is in practice mainly shown by focusing on the main part of the assessment, being the substantive test and its distinctive elements. The secondary aim is to open discussion on the topic of a personal base on competition authorities, requiring to have the necessary economical insight into the potential consequences of a merger, then allowing the authority to effectively question proposals being presented by merging competitors and rationally assess the actual risk for competition.