ARTICLE
15 October 2026

Competition And Markets Authority – Fines Imposed On A Construction Firm And Its Employees For Concealing Evidence During An Inspection

N
Nazali

Contributor

“Nazali is a law firm founded by Ersin Nazali, providing a wide range of legal services (consultancy and litigation in all areas of law) to its national and international clients, through its trustworthy and experienced legal team. There are thirteen partners, forty lawyers, four sworn financial advisors and ten certified public accountants working for Nazali. Our philosophy is quality in delivery, timely response and business minded approach.“
The UK Competition and Markets Authority has taken unprecedented enforcement action against a construction company and two of its employees for concealing evidence during an on-site inspection. This case represents the first time the CMA has imposed civil penalties on individuals for obstructing an investigation, raising questions about the scope of personal liability in competition law enforcement. The decision comes amid an ongoing investigation into suspected bid-rigging among construction firms and high
United Kingdom Antitrust/Competition Law

The Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) has imposed fines totalling £50k on construction company M&J Group (“M&J”) and two of its employees for failing to comply with investigatory requirements by concealing evidence during an on-site inspection. The decision marks the first civil penalties imposed by the CMA on individuals for concealing evidence during an investigation.

The inspection was carried out at M&J’s premises under a court warrant as part of the CMA’s ongoing investigation into 12 construction companies suspected of colluding in bids for contracts awarded by public and private sector bodies. During the inspection, M&J’s Estimating Director, Barry Pirrie, instructed Office Manager Tracey Woods to remove a work mobile phone and certain documents from the premises in order to prevent CMA investigators from locating them. Barry Pirrie was also found to have falsely told CMA officers that he did not have a work mobile phone.

Although the mobile phone and documents were returned and handed over to the CMA later the same day, the CMA considered that even temporary concealment of evidence created a risk that relevant information could be lost and resulted in unnecessary expenditure of investigative time and resources. Accordingly, the CMA imposed fines of £20,000 on Barry Pirrie, £5,000 on Tracey Woods and £25,000 on M&J.

The CMA also noted that, under its enhanced enforcement powers introduced in January 2025, businesses that fail to comply with investigatory requirements may now face fixed penalties of up to 1% of turnover, daily penalties of up to 5% of daily turnover, or both. However, as the relevant conduct occurred before the new powers entered into force, M&J was subject to the lower maximum penalty applicable at the time. The CMA emphasised that these penalties relate solely to failures to comply with its investigatory requirements and are separate from the ongoing bid-rigging investigation, in respect of which no finding of a competition law infringement has yet been made.

(CMA – 24.09.2026)

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.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More