Sanitation-service conditions in water-utility merger approvals: a comparative competition-law analysis linking merger-condition silence to service-quality remedies for affected customers

Competition authorities routinely approve water-utility mergers subject to conditions addressing tariffs, supply security and investment, yet the conditions they impose seldom mention sanitation services. Drawing on the merger-control decisions of the Competition Commission of South Africa, the UK Competition and Markets Authority, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the European Commission between 2000 and 2024, the analysis distinguishes three patterns of sanitation treatment: express conditions, implicit coverage through general service obligations, and complete silence. It argues that silence is not neutral. Because sanitation obligations in most jurisdictions attach to the utility rather than to the merger, a merger that consolidates service territories can dilute accountability for sewerage, septage and on-site sanitation without triggering any condition. The contribution is a comparative account of how competition-law remedies can be extended to sanitation without displacing sector regulation, and a set of drafting criteria for merger conditions that name sanitation explicitly.