COMMERCIAL
-
Conspiracy, the CAT, and the Court of Appeal: “Here is a case unprecedented” (The Gondoliers, Act 2)
In W.H. Newson Holding Limited & ors v IMI plc & ors [2013] EWCA Civ 1377, the Court of Appeal has made some important new law regarding the scope of section 47A of the Competition Act 1998 and the tort of common law conspiracy. The Court upheld Roth J’s decision (on which see Tom Richards’… Continue reading
-
Canadian Supreme Court: No such thing as passing on defence
On Thursday last week the Supreme Court of Canada handed down three much-anticipated judgments concerning indirect purchaser claims. The trio of cases point towards a distinctive, and in many respects more claimant-friendly, approach to class actions than that adopted in the US. They will therefore be essential reading for those preparing for the proposed new… Continue reading
-
Agreements based on Libor are not void (Phew!)
This week has brought further news on the Libor interest rate fixing saga, with UK broker ICAP receiving an $87m fine. However, whilst the media spotlight remains on the worldwide regulatory and criminal proceedings, a large number of potential claimants are waiting in the wings to bring private damages claims against those responsible for fixing… Continue reading
-
Competition round-up: Summer 2013
It is time for what has become the Competition Bulletin’s regular half-yearly update of EU and UK competition law developments. (For our previous round-ups see here). Thinking big Continue reading
-
Private enforcement: the Commission speaks at last
The trio of documents published by the Commission last week mark an important moment in private competition enforcement in the EU. After years of debate and consultation, it is now clear that, whilst the Commission is determined to take some important steps to assist claimants in private actions, it is not prepared to bring about… Continue reading
-
The economics of pass-on
The Competition Bulletin is pleased to announce that Oxera Consulting will be contributing a short series of blogs on key economic concepts for competition lawyers. Robin Noble, Oxera Associate Director and an expert economist on commercial and competition law damages actions, is our first guest blogger. His post discusses the issue of pass-on—ie, the extent… Continue reading
-
Albion v Dwr Cymru: Incompetence and counterfactuals
The Competition Appeal Tribunal today delivered that rarest of beasts: a judgment awarding damages in a follow-on claim. After its decade-long fight, Albion Water has been awarded around £2 million for Dŵr Cymru’s abuse of dominant position in relation to the price it was prepared to charge Albion for the use of its water pipes.… Continue reading
-
Subsidiaries as “branches” for undertakings: a new route to jurisdiction under Article 5(5) of the Brussels Regulation?
Stand alone, follow on and hybrid damages claims arising out of multijurisdictional cartels are generating some of the most novel and interesting current problems in conflicts of laws, both in relation to issues of jurisdiction and applicable law. On the jurisdictional side conventional wisdom has it that there are three main routes by which Claimants… Continue reading
-
Competition round-up: January 2013
As today is the first day of the new court term, I thought it would be a good moment for a round-up of last term’s competition cases – and, of course, the customary plug of our own blogs. If there was a theme to the Michaelmas term, it was the highs and lows of follow-on… Continue reading
-
Conspiracy in the CAT: the scope of section 47A
What kinds of “follow-on” claims may be brought in the CAT? ‘[A]ny claim for damages, or any other claim for a sum of money which a person who has suffered loss or damage as a result of the infringement of a relevant prohibition may make in civil proceedings brought in any part of the United… Continue reading
-
Another reason to avoid the CAT – Emerson in the Court of Appeal
The famous Victorian cricketer WG Grace is reputed once to have offered the following advice: “When you win the toss – bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague – then bat.” The recent Emerson decision [2012] EWCA Civ 1559 is another illustration… Continue reading
-
BCL No.2: The Supreme Court addresses time limits in follow-on claims
The White Paper which first proposed follow-on damages claims promised a “swift” and “streamlined” procedure. The idea was that when a regulator had made an infringement finding, there would be a simple way for victims to claim damages without having to prove the infringement afresh. In reality, however, many follow-on actions have been bogged down… Continue reading
-
Special pleading? Toshiba Carrier and the industrial tubes cartel
The Court of Appeal’s judgment last Friday in KME Yorkshire Ltd & ors v Toshiba Carrier UK Ltd & ors [2012] EWCA Civ 1990 will gladden the hearts of Article 101 damages claimants. It confirms that the Court will be generous in assessing the adequacy of a claimant’s pleaded case – at least where a… Continue reading
-
Competition round-up: Summer 2012
As most of us are now returned from our summer holidays, I thought I’d take advantage of the ‘back to school’ feeling with a round-up of the most significant competition cases since Easter. This also provides a good excuse to highlight the best blogs from the Competition Bulletin’s first couple of months. I’ll start with… Continue reading
-
CAT unlimited: the Deutsche Bahn decision
Where the Commission has issued a decision finding several addressees liable for the same infringement, amongst the more important tactical questions for a claimant in the UK are: where to sue the addressees and when? The decision of the Court of Appeal in Deutsche Bahn & AG & Ors v Morgan Crucible Company plc &… Continue reading
-
Cardiff bust-up: abuse of dominance, follow-on claims and exemplary damages
In 2 Travel Group PLC (in liquidation) v Cardiff City Transport Services Limited [2012] CAT 19 the Tribunal has made the first ever domestic award of exemplary damages for breach of competition law. The case is a significant landmark, but involves no radical development of the law; it is certainly not a declaration of “open… Continue reading
-
Supreme Court puts brake on “Euro defences”
The UK Supreme Court has given trade mark proprietors reason to celebrate, in a judgment which is likely to have important consequences for the success of “Euro defences” more broadly. See: Oracle America Inc (formerly Sun Microsystems Inc) v M-Tech Data Limited [2012] UKSC 27. From the point of view of trade mark law, the… Continue reading
