UK: UK Proposals To Increase Private Enforcement Of Competition Law

On 24 April 2012, the United Kingdom's Department for Business, Innovation & Skills published a 70-page document entitled Private Actions in Competition Law: A Consultation on Options for Reform (the Consultation) (available at

The Consultation contains some far-reaching ideas. If many or all are implemented, it could greatly increase private enforcement of competition law in the UK. In particular, the Consultation discusses:

  • Introducing an "opt-out" collective action for damages; under this collective action, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) would assess damages for a represented group of claimants, which would be bound by the outcome unless they affirmatively opt-out of the action, but claimants could come forward after the damages' award to claim their share.
  • Preserving the incentives for whistleblowers to inform competition authorities about cartels by legislating to: (i) protect leniency applications from disclosure in damages claims; and (ii) absolve an amnesty applicant from joint and several liability for all the damage caused by a cartel.
  • Widening the specialist CAT's powers to allow it to (i) rule more generally on claims for damages (and not only on claims following from an earlier finding of an infringement by a competition authority); and (ii) grant injunctions.
  • Encouraging alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and enabling the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to require that companies found to have infringed competition law compensate victims of their behaviour.

The Government's consultation period for the proposal runs until 24 July 2012.

An Opt-out Collective Action

The most radical proposal is an "opt-out" collective action before the CAT.1 Currently, UK law only allows collective claims for damages in the form of "opt-in" follow-on claims on behalf of consumers. Under the current rules, claimants must opt-in to the procedure and actually be named on the claim form. Moreover, the procedure only applies when a competition authority has already ruled that a company has infringed competition law. And it only applies to consumers. The Consultation argues that these conditions are too restrictive and notes that in almost 10 years, there has been only one collective action case. (That was an action brought by Which? following the OFT's decision fining a sport equipment retailer, JJB Sports, UK £6.7 million for fixing prices of replica football shirts, where only 130 claimants (estimated to be only 0.1% of the affected consumers) joined the action and each received UK £20 to compensate for the estimated mark-up.)

The proposed opt-out system would allow both businesses and consumers to participate in collective actions. These actions could be brought on a stand-alone basis, rather than limited to cases where a competition authority has already found a breach of competition law. For a stand-alone claim, the claimant would have to establish that competition law has been infringed and proof of loss. The CAT, which would be the only court competent to hear these claims, would assess damages based on an estimate of the total size of the consumer group potentially affected by the illegal conduct. If this change is implemented, it will greatly increase defendants' exposure to damages in the UK.

The Government is wary of promoting a "litigation culture", but believes that its proposal builds in enough safeguards to protect defendants. In particular, it proposes that:

  • The opt-out collective action would be limited to competition law infringements.
  • Only actual, and not punitive or treble damages, would be awarded.
  • The existing "loser pays" rule, which requires unsuccessful claimants to cover the defendants' costs, would be retained.
  • The CAT, as a specialised competition law tribunal, would enjoy exclusive jurisdiction over the action.
  • The CAT would have to certify that the individual or body bringing the claim is suitable and sufficiently representative of the class of claimants (this would normally exclude law firms and third party funders from bringing an action).
  • Lawyers would be prohibited from charging contingency fees, under which they take a percentage of the damages; lawyers could, however, charge conditional "no win no fee" fees and receive an increased fee if the case is successful.

Clearly this is all very controversial.

Protecting Whistleblowers and the Amnesty/Leniency Regimes

The Consultation recognises that vigorous private enforcement could alter potential whistleblowers' incentives when considering applying for leniency to the OFT or the European Commission. It emphasises the importance of public enforcement of competition law and the central role of leniency applicants in bringing cartels to the attention of authorities. To preserve whistleblowers' incentives, the Consultation suggests two important reforms.

  • First, mainly in response to the European Court of Justice's 2011 Pfleiderer judgment (Case C-360/09, Judgment of 14 June 2011), the Government discusses legislating to protect documents prepared exclusively for an amnesty/leniency application from disclosure in private damages litigation. In Pfleiderer, the European Court of Justice ruled that Member State courts must balance the public interest in disclosing to claimants documents submitted by a leniency applicant in a public enforcement procedure (in that case to the German Competition Authority), thereby possibly enabling claimants to substantiate claims for damages, against the need to protect the effectiveness of and incentives offered to applicants under leniency programmes.2 The Consultation notes that the European Commission may also legislate to prevent disclosure of leniency documents but emphasises that, if the opt-out collective action regime is implemented in the UK, such legislation would be needed urgently. Beyond its immediate effects in the EU, legislation by the UK or the EU to protect leniency documents might also help defeat attempts by the plaintiff bar to obtain disclosure in third countries (most importantly in the US), although it will be for those countries' courts to consider what deference should be granted to EU or UK legislation.
  • Second, the Consultation proposes that the liability of leniency applicants be limited to damages directly caused by their conduct. They would no longer be jointly and severally liable for all damage caused by the cartel. This proposal may appear quite radical, but it is in line with the US ACPERA legislation (which does away with joint and several liability for immunity applicants and limits their liability to single damages, provided they cooperate with plaintiffs' efforts to sue other cartel participants).

Expanded Jurisdiction for the CAT

The CAT is a specialist competition court with an established good reputation. To date, however, its jurisdiction has been limited to follow-on damages claims (after a competition authority has found illegal conduct). The Government proposes to expand this jurisdiction to allow the CAT to rule generally on claims for damages, whether or not a competition authority has already found illegal conduct. In addition, the Consultation suggests enabling the transfer of cases (or parts of cases) with competition law aspects from the High Court (or Scotland's Court of Session) to the CAT.

The Consultation also seeks views on two important evidentiary aspects of private competition law enforcement:

  • First, it proposes introducing a statutory rebuttable presumption that cartels raise prices by a fixed amount, which is currently suggested at 20%. Either the claimant or the defendant could rebut this presumption with economic evidence. While the Consultation considers that this presumption will encourage consumers to bring cases, the underlying premise that cartels normally increase prices by anything like 20% is highly controversial and eminently questionable. The prevailing view among economists is that there is no solid evidentiary support for such a presumption.
  • Second, the Consultation considers, but ultimately rejects, legislating to allow explicitly the passing-on defence under which defendants can argue that the claimant passed on the entirety of the cartel overcharge to an indirect purchaser. The Consultation recalls that courts have not yet definitively decided if this defence is part of English law, yet it expresses the view that there is no reason based on legal principle for it not to be. The Consultation also notes that it might be more appropriate to address this issue at the proper EU level.

The Consultation also proposes that the CAT have power to grant injunctive relief, which it currently lacks. As the Consultation recognises, in particular for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) claimants, injunctions can be just as important a tool for private enforcement as the possibility of damages.

The Consultation considers the possibility of a cheaper, quicker and simpler fast-track procedure for SMEs. The Consultation observes that the details would still largely need to be determined, but it suggests that both the claimants' potential damages and their liability for costs in case of failure would be capped.

ADR and Potential OFT Role in Ordering Compensation

The Consultation considers whether ADR should be mandatory before a claimant pursues private litigation, but rejects this. It does, however, put forward some ideas on how the CAT could encourage ADR; these include facilitating a formal collective settlement (such a procedure already exists in Dutch law).

The Government also considers giving the OFT discretionary power to oblige companies to compensate victims of their anti-competitive conduct. This power would only be used if the OFT had already concluded that the company had behaved illegally. The OFT would not quantify individual losses, but might define the types of loss that could be compensated and direct how compensation might be calculated; the company would then have to apply the OFT's guidance to individual cases. Rather than waiting for the OFT to impose a compensation scheme, companies could voluntarily agree to compensate and the Consultation suggests that in certain–unspecified–situations voluntary compensation might be a mitigating factor warranting a "modest" (five to 10 percent) fine reduction.

Next Steps

The Consultation period is open to 24 July 2012. The Government will publish all responses online and, within three months of 24 July, publish its conclusions based on these responses. Many of the proposals, if they are ultimately retained, will need either primary or secondary legislation before becoming law.


1. The European Commission carried out a consultation on collective redress in 2011; see Towards a Coherent European Approach on Collective Redress available at The Commission is apparently considering what follow-on proposals to make.

2. See also National Grid, in which the English High Court applied the principles of Pfleiderer to leniency documents submitted to the European Commission, Claim HC08C03243, National Grid Electricity Transmission plc v ABB Ltd and others, judgment of 4 April 2012.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions