Anti-Competitive Agreements (ACAs) Flashcards
What does the Chapter 1 Prohibition concern?
In other words, what is an Anti-Competitive Agreement (ACA)?
- An agreement, decision of associations, or concerted practice between Undertakings; that
- Has the object or effect of appreciably preventing, restricting, or distorting competition.
Agreements, Decisions, and Practices are collectively termed ACAs.
P. 67; §2(1) – CA 1998.
There is no consequential distinction between agreements, decisions, and concerted practices; while they allude to different things, the wording is ultimately intended to capture all types of unexcepted arrangements between Undertakings. See P. 82.
What are the Textbook Examples of ACAs?
- Collusive tendering.
- Fixing trading conditions.
- Joint Purchasing or Selling.
- Sharing markets or sources of supply.
- Price fixing, whether directly or indirectly, vertically or horizontally.
- Applying dissimilar terms to equivalent transactions to disrupt competition.
- Limiting or controlling production, markets, technical development, or investment.
- Making contract execution contingent on supplementary obligations that, by their nature or commercial use, have no connection to the contract’s subject.
P. 99; §2(2) – CA 1998.
The Prohibition applies in particular to such arrangements, but is not limited thereto.
Are there exceptions to the Chapter 1 Prohibition?
Yes. An arrangement will be exempt if it:
* Increases production, distribution, technical, or economic efficiency; while
* Affording consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit; and
* Does not impose restrictions unnecessary for the attainment of these objectives; or
* Substantially eliminate competition in the relevant market.
EU law is especially important to §9’s interpretation.
P. 70; §9(1) – CA 1998.
The idea is to permit agreements that enhance consumer welfare, although in practice, §9 is difficult to satisfy, and the CMA has only exceptionally decided that an ACA is accordingly.
What sort of Evidence must be Adduced to satisfy §9?
Empirical evidence of a direct, causal relationship between the Agreement and its expected efficiencies. Therefore, the following must be shown:
1. The nature of the claimed efficiencies.
2. The causal link between the Agreement and the efficiencies.
3. The likelihood and magnitude of each claimed efficiency.
4. How and when each claimed efficiency would be achieved.
P. 166-168; Art. 101(3) Guidelines, Para. 51-54; Sainsbury’s v MasterCard [2020] UKSC 24, at [116]–[118].
Regarding §9, what does it mean to Increase Production, Distribution, Technical, or Economic Efficiency?
To objectively and appreciably cause an improvement in the relevant field that compensates for losses from weaker competition.
P. 166; Joined Cases 56 and 58/64 Consten and Grundig EU:C:1966:19, P. 348.
Regarding §9, what does it mean to Afford Consumers a Fair Share of the Resulting Benefit?
All direct and indirect users must either gain from, be unaffected by, or compensated for losses caused by the Agreement.
P. 170; Art. 101(3) Guidelines, Para. 85; Sainsbury’s v MasterCard [2020] UKSC 24, at [173]–[174].
Regarding §9, what does it mean to only impose Necessary Restrictions?
To only impose restrictions that necessarily create or increase efficiencies relative to the counterfactual.
Imaginably, the standard is strict.
P. 172; Case T-86/95 Compagnie Générale Maritime v Commission EU:T:2002:50, at [392]–[395].
What is an Undertaking?
Any natural or legal person engaged in economic activity, regardless of its legal status or the way it is financed.
P. 73; Case C-41/90 Höfner and Elser EU:C:1991:161, at [21].
Companies, firms, businesses, partnerships, individuals operating as sole traders, agricultural cooperatives, trade associations, non-profit organisations, and public entities can all be undertakings — the relevant consideration is whether they are engaged in economic activity or represent commercial interests.
What is an Economic Activity?
Any activity of an industrial or commercial nature consisting of offering goods and services on the market.
P. 73; Case 118/85 Commission v Italy EU:C:1987:283, at [7].
May an Entity be considered an Undertaking for certain activities but not for others?
Yes. Functionally, the relevant activity must be distinct from the entity’s non-regulated activities.°
P. 74;UKRS Training v NSAR [2017] CAT 14 at [67].
For example, public bodies are not considered Undertakings unless they engage in economic activities, and even then, are only deemed Undertakings vis-à-vis those activities. See CP/1139-01, OFT Decision of 25 October 2002, at [12].
What are the Consequences of Undertakings being distinct from the notion of Legal Personality?
A single Undertaking can comprise multiple legal persons, meaning:
* Intra-Group Agreements (IGAs) may escape the Chapter 1 Prohibition’s scope, since there would be no arrangement between Undertakings; and
* Parents may be held liable for their Subsidiaries’ actions.
P. 80.
Under the Chapter 1 Prohibition, when will a Parent be held liable for the actions of its Subsidiary?
When the Parent exercises, or may exercise, decisive influence over the Subsidiary, such that the two form a single economic unit.
P. 81; Case C-97/08 P Akzo Nobel v Commission EU:C:2009:536.
Influence need not be exercised directly. See Durkan v OFT [2011] CAT 6.
What is an Agreement between Undertakings?
A concurrence of wills between at least two parties representing a faithful expression of their intentions, regardless of form.
P. 82; JJB Sports v OFT [2004] CAT 17, at [637]–[644].
In practice, this definition is construed quite widely, extending to one-off meetings, gentleman’s agreements, terminated agreements, incomplete agreements, agreements made under duress, agreements between representatives without corporate authority, and passively participative agreements where the Undertaking does not actively distance itself.
What is a Decision of an Association of Undertakings?
Any form of collective action effected by the Undertakings that prevents, restricts, or distorts competition.
P. 85; CA98/1/2003, OFT Decision of 3 February 2003, at [37].
This includes the Association’s rules, constitution, recommendations, day-to-day conduct, managerial decisions, Board resolutions, etc., regardless of whether they are binding or fully implemented.
What is a Concerted Practice between Undertakings?
A form of collusion, falling short of an agreement, that knowingly involves practical cooperation to circumvent competition.
P. 88-89; JJB Sports v OFT [2004] CAT 17, at [638].
The classic example is reciprocal contact between Undertakings with the intention or effect to remove or reduce uncertainty regarding future conduct in the market. See [640]. They may even occur indirectly. See Argos v OFT [2004] CAT 24, at [659].
What is the difference between an Agreement and a Concerted Practice between Undertakings?
Concerted practices are relatively opaque and formless, although difference is imprecise.
P. 88-89.