Raffinerie Tirlemontoise and Südzucker under investigation by the Belgian Competition Authority for suspected abuse of economic dependence
On 6 February 2026, the Belgian Competition Authority (‘BCA’) announced that it had sent a statement of objections to Raffinerie Tirlemontoise NV and its parent company, Südzucker AG, relating to a possible abuse of economic dependence on sugar beet growers.
Raffinerie Tirlemontoise is a Belgian sugar refinery and industrial group which is controlled by Südzucker, a global leader in sugar production, based in Germany, that has consolidated its acquisitions of various European sugar refineries through the years.
Since 2020, abuses of economic dependence have been forbidden in Belgium under Article IV.2/1 of the Code of Economic Law (‘CDE’). Such abuse of economic dependence occurs when one of several companies uses its position to impose unfair conditions on one of various trading partners that has a suspected impact on competition in the Belgian market or a substantial part of it. Section I.6, 17 of the CDE characterizes economic dependence as the absence of a reasonably equivalent alternative available within a reasonable period of time, on reasonable terms and at reasonable cost, allowing the partner(s) of the undertaking to impose benefits or conditions that could not be obtained under normal market circumstances.
In this new investigation, the BCA points to potential unfair contractual conditions affecting Raffinerie Tirlemontoise’s suppliers that may create uncertainty about their expected revenues. According to the BCA, their suppliers’ autonomy in managing their agricultural and commercial activities would therefore be limited, and the commercial risks of the sugar supply chain would be borne disproportionately by them.
At this stage of the procedure, the BCA considers that the affected growers may be economically dependent on Raffinerie Tirlemontoise under Article IV.2/1 of the CDE, taking into account the structure of the sugar market and the limited availability of alternative purchasers. These findings are still provisional and will be tested in the adversarial phase of the procedure. Raffinerie Tirlemontoise and Südzucker will now have the opportunity to access the file and present their legal arguments.
It should be remembered that an abuse of economic dependency may be sanctioned by the BCA at the end of the procedure launched ex officio, or following a complaint, by a fine of up to 2% of the domestic and export turnover achieved in the year preceding the decision. Furthermore, the periodic penalty payment of 2% of the daily turnover may be imposed until the practice in question has ceased. The infringement may also give rise to private enforcement before the Belgian courts.
It is the second investigation opened by the BCA on alleged abuses of economic dependence. The first inquiry initiated in 2023 in the agricultural sector is still ongoing. Although the BCA is the competent authority to tackle this type of infringement under the CDE, most cases have been handled by national jurisdictions in commercial disputes in relation to prohibitory injunctions.
