This is the new MLex platform. Existing customers should continue to use the existing MLex platform until migrated.
For any queries, please contact Customer Services or your Account Manager.
Dismiss

Brazil antitrust official defends interim measures as key tool in digital markets

By Maria Júlia Baumert

March 23, 2026, 23:24 GMT | Insight
An officer for Brazil’s competition authority reinforced the role of interim measures as an effective and necessary tool to prevent harm in fast-moving digital markets, particularly in countries that lack a specific regulatory framework for online platforms.
An officer for Brazil’s competition authority officer reinforced the role of interim measures as an effective and necessary tool to prevent harm in fast-moving  digital markets, particularly in countries that lack a specific regulatory framework for online platforms.

Speaking during a conference* on Monday about a recent case involving Meta’s WhatsApp (see here), Bruno Renzetti, chief of staff at the Tribunal of the Administrative Council for Economic Defense, or CADE, said the authority’s decision to uphold an interim measure shows how preventive action can protect competition while investigations are ongoing.

The case arose after two companies filed a complaint alleging that WhatsApp’s updated terms of use would prevent competing artificial intelligence chatbots from interacting with the messaging platform, while Meta’s own AI service would be embedded by default. Given WhatsApp’s central role in Brazil, Renzetti said the potential competitive harm required swift action.

CADE’s Superintendence, it's investigative arm, issued an interim measure preventing Meta from enforcing the new terms against competing AI services while Meta AI remained installed by default and could not be removed by users. The decision was later upheld by CADE’s Tribunal.

Renzetti said the measure does not prejudge the outcome of the case, which remains under investigation. Instead, it serves to prevent potential harm before it becomes irreversible.

He added that such tools are particularly important in digital markets, where competitive dynamics evolve rapidly and enforcement delays can render final decisions ineffective.

The CADE officer argued that interim measures have gained importance globally, including in discussions at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, and should not be viewed as overly complex or novel. While they have long been used in other sectors, Renzetti said their relevance is growing in technology markets because of the speed at which conduct can scale.

“Four years is a very fast case in digital markets,” he said, noting that interim measures allow authorities to target specific conduct early and potentially curb harm before it worsens.

Renzetti said he expects CADE to rely on interim measures more frequently in the future, particularly in digital cases, while emphasizing that they must always respect legal parameters.

Interim measures often have practical effects beyond simply halting conduct, according to the officer. In CADE’s experience, he said, such measures frequently prompt companies to engage with the authority and seek negotiated outcomes.

“In our current practice, interim measures most of the time lead to commitments,” Renzetti said.

He added that, as part of these arrangements, companies may be required to acknowledge the conduct under investigation, reinforcing the preventive and corrective role of interim measures.

*"The Washington Antitrust and Digital Markets Forum," organized by MLex, George Washington University Competition Law Center, and Forum Global; Washington, DC, March 23, 2026.

Please email editors@mlex.com to contact the editorial staff regarding this story, or to submit the names of lawyers and advisers.

Tags