On 2 June 2025, the European Commission (“EC”) imposed a substantial EUR 329 million fine on Delivery Hero and Glovo for their involvement in a cartel in the online food delivery sector.
This landmark decision marks the first cartel decision concerning the labour market, as well asthe first time the EC has sanctioned anticompetitive conduct facilitated through a minority shareholding in a competitor.
Namely, Delivery Hero and Glovo were active competitors in several EEA countries. In July 2018, Delivery Hero acquired a non-controlling minority stake in Glovo, and four years later, by July 2022, it had taken full control of the company.
Following dawn raids at Delivery Hero and Glovo’s premises in 2022 and 2023, the EC launched a formal investigation into Delivery Hero and Glovo’s operations. The probe was triggered by a market monitoring exercise, which itself had been prompted by information from a national competition authority and reports submitted via the EC’s anonymous whistleblower tool.
The EC ended the investigation and concluded that during the four-year period of minority ownership, Delivery Hero and Glovo engaged in a series of anticompetitive practices that amounted to cartel behaviour.
While the EC’s formal decision has not yet been published, its press release outlines the key elements of the cartel: (i) a no-poach agreement regarding each other’s employees, (ii) the exchange of commercially sensitive information, and (iii) the allocation of geographic markets.
No-Poach Agreement
The EC found that when Delivery Hero acquired a minority stake in Glovo, the two companies concluded a shareholder agreement with a limited no-hire clause for certain employees. This clause was soon expanded into a broader no-poaching arrangement.
No-poach agreements are arrangements where employers agree not to “take over” each other’s employees. These agreements come in various forms: “no-hire” agreements prevent employers from actively or passively hiring employees from other parties, while “non-solicit” (or “no-cold-calling”) agreements prohibit actively approaching another employer’s staff with job offers.
In 2024, the European Union published a policy brief clarifying its stance on no-poach and wage-fixing agreements (which are agreements where employers agree to fix wages or other types of compensation or benefits). The brief explicitly states that such agreements generally constitute a restriction of competition by object, which are strictly prohibited and unlikely to qualify for any exemption from the prohibition.
The Delivery Hero/Glovo marked the first time the EC has effectively applied this approach in practice.
The exchange of commercially sensitive information
Secondly, Delivery Hero and Glovo unlawfully exchanged commercially sensitive information during the period when Delivery Hero was a minority shareholder of Glovo. The exchanged information, per words of EC Commissioner Ms. Ribera, included “current pricing strategies and future pricing intentions”. In the previous practice of the EC, such exchange of commercially sensitive information between competitors can breach competition rules.
The allocation of geographic markets
Finally, the EC established that in the same four-year period, Delivery Hero and Glovo divided national markets for online food delivery in the EEA, which is another serious form of anticompetitive conduct in which competitors agree not to compete in specific geographic areas.
According to the EC’s findings, the companies coordinated their geographical expansion plans across the EEA. They prearranged which of them would enter new markets where neither had a presence, avoiding direct competition from the outset. In markets where one was already operating, the other would stay out, reinforcing their separate positions. In some cases, to maintain this separation, the companies exchanged business operations to ensure only one company remained active in each country.
This collusive behaviour significantly limited competition across multiple EEA states. In affected markets, consumers could only access one platform, either Delivery Hero or Glovo, leaving them with no ability to choose services, prices, or special offers.
Activities of the competition authorities in Southeast Europe[1]
The Delivery Hero/Glovo confirms an increased interest in labour market issues across Europe, with several national competition authorities in countries such as Belgium, France, Poland, Portugal, and the UK recently imposing fines for anti-competitive no-poach and wage-fixing agreements across various industries.
In contrast, competition authorities in Southeast Europe have not yet pursued investigations into labour market infringements, nor have they investigated (ab)use of minority shareholdings as a means of facilitating anti-competitive conduct. However, given their increasing focus on consumer-facing sectors like retail and telecommunications, enforcement in this area may be forthcoming.
Companies operating in the region should therefore be aware that labour-related coordination, such as no-poach or wage-fixing arrangements, can breach competition rules. Reviewing existing practices and agreements to ensure compliance with competition law is strongly recommended.
Further, it is important to note that while holding minority stakes in competing companies is generally permitted, companies must be cautious not to engage in anticompetitive conduct. In particular, they should ensure that these shareholdings do not lead to the exchange of commercially sensitive information beyond what is necessary for their role as investors.
The information in this document does not constitute legal advice on any particular matter and is provided for general informational purposes only.
[1] Reference to “Southeast Europe” or the “region” in this article covers the following jurisdictions: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, and Slovenia.
