UK: UK Competition Appeal Tribunal Finds That Ping's Online Sales Ban Was An Unjustified Restriction

On 7 September 2018, the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") rejected the appeal brought by the golf club manufacturer Ping against the decision of the Competition and Markets Authority ("CMA") of 24 August 2017 imposing a fine of £1.45 million on Ping for infringing both Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 and Article 101 TFEU by banning online sales of its customised golf clubs (see VBB on Competition Law, Volume 2017, No. 8, available at 

Ping has a long-standing policy of face-to-face custom fitting for its golf clubs, which it has sought to promote by consistently preventing the retailers in its selective distribution system from selling its golf clubs online. In defence of this policy, Ping raised several grounds of appeal in challenging the CMA's 2017 decision, all of which were rejected by the CAT.

In essence, the CAT agreed with the CMA that the consumer benefits resulting from Ping's legitimate policy of promoting custom fitting (i.e., receiving a better quality product) could be achieved by less restrictive alternative means than a general online sales ban, in particular, by specific online interactive features. The CAT further rejected Ping's arguments that its brand image could be harmed without the ban because of the risk that consumers would buy the wrong golf clubs. The case illustrates that it will be exceptionally difficult, if not impossible, to justify a general online sales ban as necessary to protect a brand and provide specific consumer benefits.

The individual pleas raised in the appeal are considered in more detail below.

Dismissal of Ping's arguments that the CMA's decision infringed its human rights

First, Ping argued that the CMA's decision contravened its rights under Article 16 of the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights (the "EU Charter"), which concerns the freedom to conduct business, by requiring it to sell non-fitted clubs which are products that it does not wish to sell. It further argued that the decision contravened its right under Article 17 of the EU Charter (concerning the right to property) because forcing Ping to give up its unique position of selling only customised clubs would undermine the goodwill of its business. The CAT rejected this ground of appeal noting that, where a restriction is found to be a restriction by object that does not meet the conditions for exemption under Article 101(3) TFEU (see further below), the limitation of rights under Articles 16 and 17 of the EU Charter is a proportionate means to avoid the distortion of competition in the EU. It also found that: (i) Ping was not forced to sell products it did not wish to sell, since it already sold a number of golf clubs without prior custom fitting; and (ii) Ping had failed to establish that prohibiting the internet sales ban would deprive its business of goodwill.

Upholding of CMA's finding that the internet sales ban constitutes a restriction of competition "by object"

The CAT agreed with the CMA's finding that the objective of the internet ban was to prohibit online sales of Ping's golf clubs, and the fact that the restriction also had the legitimate aim of promoting custom fitting did not preclude a finding that the agreement had an anti-competitive object. The CAT then considered whether the ban revealed in itself a sufficient degree of harm to competition to be considered a restriction by object. The CAT answered this in the affirmative, pointing out that the impact on consumers and retailers was real and material since: (i) it significantly restricted consumers from accessing retailers outside their local area and from comparing prices (for example, since prices were not widely available on online price comparison tools); and (ii) it significantly reduced the ability of, and incentives for, retailers to compete for business using the internet.

Upholding of the CMA's finding that the internet sales ban was not objectively justified

The CAT noted that, in order for an internet sales ban to be objectively justified and to fall outside the scope of Article 101(1) TFEU, it must satisfy the Metro criteria, in particular, it must be necessary for non-price competition to exist. In this respect, it was clear that the policy was not objectively justified, since Ping could still compete with other manufacturers on non-price parameters (e.g., quality and innovation) without the internet sales ban. This was made clearer by the fact that other golf club manufacturers did not prohibit online sales but nevertheless competed vigorously with Ping on non-price parameters. The CAT further pointed out that the distinct question of whether the ban enabled Ping to compete more vigorously on non-price parameters was to be assessed separately under Article 101(3) TFEU.

Dismissal of Ping's arguments that the CMA erred in finding that the ban on internet sales was disproportionate

Ping argued that the CMA was wrong, in its analysis under Article 101(1) TFEU, to find Ping's internet policy to be disproportionate, particularly since the alternative measures proposed by the CMA would be impractical and less effective than the ban. While the CAT considered that, in this case, the extensive assessment of proportionality carried out by the CMA should have been part of its assessment under Article 101(3) TFEU, rather than under Article 101(1) TFEU, the CAT nevertheless agreed with the CMA that the internet sales ban was disproportionate.

Ping challenged the CMA's findings that: (i) the ban was not necessary since there were alternative and less restrictive measures to meet the legitimate aim; and that (ii) the restrictive nature of the ban was disproportionate to the promotion of custom fitting. With respect to the necessity of the ban, the CAT considered that the notion of necessity requires an assessment of whether a less intrusive measure could have been used without unacceptably compromising the promotion of custom fitting. Three key issues had to be resolved in order to conduct this assessment: (i) whether Ping's legitimate aim should be characterised as "promoting" or as - which would favour Ping's case - "maximising" custom fitting (the CAT found the former); (ii) whether the internet ban was effective (the CAT found that it was not); and (iii) whether there were realistic and less restrictive alternatives to the ban.

With regard to this third issue, Ping's fundamental objection to alternative measures, such as the online interactive features which the CMA had considered could be used by Ping, was that they would lead to customers making uninformed decisions by guessing their custom-fit measurements. This would, in Ping's view, ultimately harm its brand, as well as cause free-riding among retailers. (These interactive features included live chat windows, advisory notices strongly recommending custom fitting, drop-down boxes with a range of relevant Ping custom-fit options, and mandatory tick boxes for customers to accept the risks of purchasing without custom fitting.)

The CAT, however, dismissed these objections pointing out the following:

  • the price of clubs, the number of customisable options and the fact that customers keep clubs for a number of years all suggested that customers would be inherently unlikely to buy clubs without a prior custom fitting;
  • the Court of Justice of the European Union has already endorsed the use of online interactive features as providing adequate protection against the risk of customers purchasing incorrect products in the case of contact lenses and non-prescription medications; and
  • custom fitted clubs of other brands are available online.

For these reasons, the CAT found that the alternative measures proposed by the CMA would not lead to customers guessing their specifications and buying the wrong clubs, and would not damage Ping's brand. In this respect, the CAT also pointed out that Ping already allowed sales of its clubs without a custom fitting (e.g., via telephone). It also found no evidence that the alternative measures would reduce incentives to invest in custom fitting, triggering a free-rider concern, instead emphasising the incentives to invest that are created by the very high conversion rate of custom fittings into sales.

The CAT, therefore, found that the ban was not necessary to achieve its legitimate aim and was therefore disproportionate.

Dismissal of Ping's arguments that the internet sales ban constituted an ancillary restraint

The CAT noted that, in order for a restriction to fall outside Article 101(1) TFEU as an ancillary restraint, it must be objectively necessary to the implementation of a main operation which has a neutral or positive effect on competition which would otherwise be impossible. In this respect, the CAT pointed out that since (as described above) the ban was not necessary for the promotion of custom fitting, it could similarly not be impossible to promote custom fitting without it. The ban was therefore not an ancillary restraint.

Dismissal of Ping's arguments that the ban was exempted under Article 101(3) TFEU

Ping contended that the ban should be exempted under Article 101(3) TFEU, since it produced real benefits for consumers which could not be achieved in a different way. In deciding that the four cumulative conditions of Article 101(3) TFEU were not all met, the CAT emphasised that the ban was not a particularly effective means of increasing custom-fitting rates and was not indispensable as it had been established that alternative means existed which would be effective. In addition, consumers would not obtain a fair share of the benefits, taking into account that: (i) the benefits that would accrue were very limited and would do little to counteract free-riding; and (ii) these benefits would not outweigh the disadvantages to consumers in terms of increased inconvenience and reduced choice of retailers.

Reduction of the fine since the CMA erred in treating director involvement as an aggravating factor

The CAT finally reduced the fine from £1.45 million to £1.25 million, based on the ground that the CMA erred in treating director involvement as an aggravating factor in this specific case, since the directors sought to pursue a legitimate aim with the internet policy.

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
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
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