Economic complexity: CAT vs High Court
One of the advantages of the Competition Appeal Tribunal is said to be the fact that its three-member panel typically includes an economist. But is that really such a big advantage over the High Court? The question is particularly topical in light of a couple of recent trends. On the one hand, recent legislative developments have… Continue reading
Standalone claims in the CAT: bypassing the transitional rules
We have written before about the problems inherent in the transitional provisions of the new Consumer Rights Act 2015 (see Tom de la Mare QC’s blog here). A recent decision from Mr Justice Barling in the Mastercard litigation places a (small) sticking plaster over some of the difficulties. One problem is that the transitional provisions… Continue reading
PRIVATE ACTIONS: The CRA 2015 giveth; and the 2015 CAT Rules taketh away
Introduction Today, on the 1st October 2015, when we are supposed to be celebrating the brave new world of the Competition Act 1998 (“CA”) as amended by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“CRA”), cartelists and other competition law infringers up and down the land must be rubbing their hands in glee at the transitional provisions… Continue reading
Skyscanner: CAT quashes commitments in the online booking sector
In a judgment handed down on Friday, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has quashed the Office of Fair Trading’s decision to accept commitments in the online hotel booking sector. As the first case to consider such commitments, Skyscanner Ltd v CMA  CAT 16 contains some helpful guidance, albeit that Skyscanner’s success actually hinged on a… Continue reading
Dogma in telecoms, cream for the CAT: 08- numbers in the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court yesterday handed down judgment in British Telecommunications plc v Telefónica O2 UK Ltd & Ors  UKSC 42. Reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal (blogged on here by Emily Neill), Lord Sumption for a unanimous Supreme Court held that there had been no basis for Ofcom to disallow BT’s introduction… Continue readingAccess Directive, Article 20, Article 5, Article 8, call termination, CAT, competition appeal tribunal, contract, Court of Appeal, Directive 2002/19/EC, Directive 2002/21/EC, dispute resolution, disputes, Framework Directive, interconnection, Lord Sumption, s. 185, s. 192, section 185, section 192, supreme court, telecoms
Cats, bags, rings and rooms: the problem of confidentiality
Dealing with confidential information in competition cases can be tricky. The CAT’s recent judgment in BMI Healthcare and others v Competition Commission  CAT 241 provides some help. The core problem of confidentiality in the context of competition law is that many of the arguments deployed by litigants and regulators rely upon information which is… 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
This blog is produced by a group of barristers at Blackstone Chambers and is edited by Tristan Jones, Tom Coates and Flora Robertson.
We hope to spark debate, and encourage all readers to leave comments on the site.
If you have queries for Blackstone Chambers you will find the appropriate contact details here.