Merger Control Hiring: Brussels at the Center

Merger control lawyers are hired in Brussels first. Sartori & Partners data show that Brussels took 23.9% of merger control lateral moves in the 12 months to October 2026, while the same city took 0.9% of all lateral moves in the market. That puts Brussels at an index of 2,783 against the market's city mix. London, the second city on the list, reads 175. For a firm planning a competition hire, the search starts in one city and widens from there, and most of the shortlist will sit inside the largest firms.

An index of 2,783 is not the product of a thin base. Brussels recorded 34 merger control moves in 12 months, the largest city count in the specialty, against 23 in London. The antitrust and competition practice as a whole already leans on the city, with a Brussels index of 1,258. Merger control leans 2.2 times as hard as its own practice.

The practice list reads very differently. Across antitrust and competition, New York leads the 12-month city list at 16.2% and Washington, DC follows at 12.5%, with Brussels fourth at 10.8%. In merger control, Brussels heads the list. London holds 16.2% of merger control moves, above its 11.8% in the practice and its 9.2% in the whole market, but an index of 175 describes a large market that also does merger work, not a specialist hub. The consequence for a hiring firm is plain: a merger control search that skips Brussels skips the deepest pool, and a firm with no office there either opens one or pays to move a candidate.

A longer window widens the picture without moving its center. Over three years, Sartori & Partners recorded 419 merger control lateral moves. Brussels took 19.3%, Washington, DC 17.2% and London 16.9%, with 2.4 points between first and third. New York follows at 10.5% and Paris at 7.9%.

The sibling specialty shows how unusual this is. Antitrust litigation, listed under the same practice, is an American market over the same three years: New York took 24.6% of its moves and Washington, DC 21.2%, with London at 7.5%. Merger control is the corner of competition law where a European city sets the pace and the American capital shares it. Merger lawyers also cross city lines more often: 23.0% of merger control moves with both cities known involved a change of city, against 19.3% in the practice and 20.5% across the market. A firm hiring in Washington, DC or London can expect a local pool over time; a firm hiring in Paris or another smaller center should plan to draw candidates from Brussels or London and budget for the move.

Hiring in this specialty sits in few hands. In the 12 months to October 2026, the ten firms that hired most took 50.0% of individual merger control hires, against 25.8% in the antitrust and competition practice and 28.0% in antitrust litigation. Across the whole lateral market the top 10 took 12.9%. Only 58 firms hired a merger control lawyer in the period, against 175 that hired in the practice.

Latham & Watkins ranks first, in the 11-20 band of hires, and three firms share the 6-10 band behind it. Over three years the top 10 took 38.5% of merger control hires, so the last 12 months ran more concentrated than the longer record. For a firm outside this group, each candidate is contested by a short list of firms that hire again and again, and an offer has to answer their platform as well as their pay.

Firm size is the second filter. Among merger control moves to firms of known size, firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 85.2% in 12 months, against 66.1% in the antitrust practice and 53.6% across the market. Firms of 400-999 lawyers took 10.6% of merger control hires, against 23.4% in the market.

The longer record says the same. Over three years, 80.3% of merger control hires went to firms of 1,000+ lawyers, against 67.6% in the practice. The work explains much of it: a transaction that must clear several authorities at once favors firms with competition teams in each of those capitals, and the filing timetable leaves little room to stitch together counsel from different firms. A firm of 400-999 lawyers building a merger control bench is recruiting against that pull. It wins candidates on role, partnership terms and a clear deal flow, rarely on the reach of its office network.

Merger control hiring held flat (-7.9%) year on year: 152 moves in the earlier settled 12 months and 140 in the latest. The antitrust and competition practice held flat (+7.7%) over the same windows, while the whole market rose 9.0%. Merger control lawyers accounted for 34.4% of the practice's moves over 12 months, close to the 33.2% for antitrust litigation.

Partner hiring held flat (+30.8%): 39 partners in the earlier settled 12 months and 51 in the latest. On counts this small, a gap of that size sits inside what chance alone produces. Partners made up 35.9% of merger control moves in 12 months, against 32.4% in the practice and 27.7% across the market. A steady count means the pool is not deepening: firms in this field approach the same people year after year, so timing and preparation weigh more than volume.

Sartori & Partners data point to four practical choices for a firm that wants merger control capacity. First, place the search in Brussels, where 23.9% of 12-month merger control moves landed; a firm without a Brussels presence should price an office or a relocation into the plan from the start. Second, treat London and Washington, DC as the second ring: over three years they took 16.9% and 17.2% of moves, enough for a local search on a longer timetable. Third, expect to compete with the largest platforms, since firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 85.2% of hires; a smaller firm should lead with the role and the partnership terms. Fourth, move early: with hiring flat at 140 moves in the latest settled 12 months, the candidates who move each year are few and known to every active hirer. On the data date, law-firm career pages carried 51 open roles tagged to merger control, a sign that the firms already in this market keep looking.