The Competition Act 1998 governs anti-competitive behaviour from a legislation standpoint, and can be used in both CMA prosecutions and Competition Lawyers legal claims.
The principles of this vital piece of legislation are that organisations must not:
This is most easily achieved through Price Fixing and Price Cartels
Price Fixing is exactly that you expect it is - fixing prices higher than they should be to increase profitability, when organisations should be fairly competing on price.
Price Cartels - where organisations set prices together, usually to maximise their profitability. For example, all competitors setting the same or similar prices at a higher rate so all those involved reap higher profit margins at the expense of the consumer - which is anti-competitive behaviour.
This type of anti-competitive behaviour can easily occur in an oligopoly market where a small number of organisations dominate the market. A classic example of this is the grocery market that is typically dominated by a few big household names: Tesco; Asda, Sainsbury's; Morrison's, etc.
Supermarkets in the past have been found guilty of price fixing - one of those most famous examples here in the UK was the price fixing of milk, which involved the big names above, and resulted in millions of pounds in fines.
The simple rules of Supply and Demand usually mean that prices are lower where goods and services are easily obtainable, and higher when they are not. It's the reason diamonds are so expensive - they are very rare!
But intentionally reducing output by lowering the quantity of a good or service to then increase prices is anti-competitive behaviour which only leads to bigger profits for the business and higher prices for the consumer.
This is a growing problem.
Organisations may find new ways of producing products or offering a service that could reduce the cost to the consumer. But if it's at the expense of their profits, it can immediately become undesirable.
If an organisation (or organisations) intentionally reduce innovation to maintain higher profit margins, they can be in breach of the law. A famous example of innovation costing business is that of Dyson and the bagless vacuum cleaner. When Mr Dyson first approached big name vacuum cleaner firms, they rejected his bagless vacuum idea for one some reason - it would mean they would lose money on selling bags to consumers! Whilst we're not saying this was a breach of consumer law, the principle is reflective of how innovation can actually cost businesses money, and therefore be undesirable.
At the time, the market for disposable bags was worth literally millions of pounds, and big name vacuum cleaner manufactures were simply not prepared to lose that source of revenue.
Luckily, Mr Dyson went it alone and has since established himself as a market leader in vacuum cleaning technology - and bags are a thing of the past!
In contrast to the above, some innovations can mean that consumers enjoy additional benefits of a product or a service. Those additional benefits can come at a cost for sensible and justifiable reasons, which is why you typically pay more for "better" goods and services.
But innovation that can be used across an industry can leave organisations colluding together and price fixing off the back of innovation; which is again a breach of the law.
Generally speaking, if one organisation has a market share of over 40%, the CMA will likely be looking in to it. It has to be carefully assessed for mergers as well with the combined market share being closely monitored.
An organisation with market dominance could easily abuse their position through:
This can actually lead to organisations falling in to a cartel without even realising. What can seem like an innocent information sharing exercise can actually undermine competitiveness in the market, leading to an un-level playing field for other organisations to compete in.
Sharing commercially sensitive information, such as profit margins or supplier information, can lead to anti-competitive behaviour. Information sharing itself is the way in which price fixing can be achieved, either by itself, or through innovation reduction or price fixing off the back of innovation.
Victims can claim compensation for financial loses and interest as a result of anti-competitive behaviour - and this is exactly what we help people do.
The CMA can fine organisations 10% of their annual turnover for every year they're found to have been in breach of the law, up to a maximum of three years. Fines can, and have in the past, reached to the billions of pounds.
Fill out our quick call back form below and we'll contact you when you're ready to talk to us.
All fields marked with a * are required.
At the beginning of March, the CMA announced that it had launched an Apple App Store investigation over allegations that the ...May 05, 2021
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has issued fines as a result of their nortriptyline investigation. Nortriptyline ...Apr 14, 2021
There has been a suspected breach of consumer protection law on secondary ticketing websites that the Competition Markets Aut...Mar 10, 2021
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is carrying out a market investigation into the supply of services by funeral dir...Feb 10, 2021
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched an investigation into hidden advertising by Instagram influencers, a...Jan 19, 2021
On 17 April 2018, the Competition Markets Authority (CMA) began a formal investigation into suspected anti-competitive practi...Dec 15, 2020
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched a review of the implementation and impact of the recommendations of ...Nov 04, 2020