Cartel Proceedings Against Brau Union: Judge Pushes for Settlement by End of 2026

The proceedings are sensitive because the Cartel Court can impose fines of up to ten percent of group revenue – not, however, on Brau Union itself, but on its Dutch parent Heineken, which generated more than 34 billion euros in revenue last year. In the event of a guilty verdict, this could be one of the highest cartel fines ever imposed in Austria.

Potential Fine of Up to 3.4 Billion Euros

The BWB accuses the brewing group of having exerted „influence on the activity of independent beverage retailers." At the centre is the question of whether Brau Union put pressure on logistics partners and beverage retailers to secure distribution for its own brands – such as Wieselburger or Villacher. An evaluative submission presented by Brau Union on Tuesday prompted incomprehension from Judge Vetter.

„No more evaluative submissions, please, that is simply unnecessary," she urged representatives of the brewing group and the BWB. „I find these submissions unnecessary," said the judge. The competition authorities also expressed themselves „surprised" by the application. A BWB representative explained that they had wanted to use „the positive momentum in the proceedings." The submission was now „a step in the other direction."

On Tuesday morning, a former manager of the Vereinigte Kärntner Brauereien (VKB) was heard as a witness. He had served in management both when Brau Union and the Herberstein family still shared a 50:50 stake and after the takeover. The VKB, which includes the brands Villacher, Schleppe, and Piestinger, was fully taken over by Brau Union in 2014.

Ex-Manager: Observed No Pressure on Retailers

The witness explained that for beer, „an attractive brand is decisive for the beverage retailer." „It depends on the geographic location. In cities like Vienna, by contrast, it is minimal," he described regional differences. He had never observed any pressure exerted by Brau Union on logistics partners. When asked by the judge „Are people being pushed around?" he answered evasively. „Whether it's Pepsi or Cola is also not so important," said the ex-manager.

His departure from the brewery had been „a purely personal decision," and there had been „no disagreements whatsoever," he said in response to the judge's question. He had left the company because executives in the group „needed a great deal of regional flexibility." Before the full takeover, they had always faced Brau Union „as a competitor in the market."

Judge Increases Pressure for Settlement

Brau Union had for the first time openly signalled its willingness to engage in settlement talks in December 2025. On Tuesday, a Brau Union lawyer announced in court that they intended to approach the BWB in the summer „with a few concrete issues." „The idea is to be very far along by the next hearing date in September." Vetter was fundamentally open to this: „If there is convergence over the summer, I am always happy to hear of significant progress."

She had been „very annoyed" about the evaluative application, the judge said with reference to the latest submission. At the same time, Vetter made it unambiguously clear for the first time that she „would like to reach a conclusion at some point." The court is thereby increasing pressure on both sides to find a solution this year, or at least to complete the taking of evidence.

If there is no convergence in autumn, further witnesses will have to testify. Observers expect that the proceedings could still be concluded in 2026 in the event of a settlement. Otherwise, a decision could be delayed until 2027 or later – with a penalty range that, depending on the outcome, could reach into the billions.

The Federal Competition Authority remained reserved following the hearing. It said the summer would be used for „constructive" talks. He had „not been operationally involved in the relationship with the beverage retailers" at the time, the witness had previously stated. Whether the talks will actually lead to a settlement remains open for now.