Concerted practice (Commercial) meaning

This Practice Note examines the principles governing the tort whereby a defendant deliberately interferes with a claimant’s rights in a judgment debt. For wider guidance on enforcing judgments, see: Introduction to enforcement—overview and related content. What is the Marex tort? The Marex tort describes a tort-based cause of action premised on an alleged intentional infringement of the claimant’s rights in a judgment debt. Its contours were first confirmed by Bryan J in 2021 in Lakatamia v Su, having been raised by Knowles J in 2017 in Marex v Garcia (also known as Marex v Sevilleja). See: Marex tort—history below. In Lakatamia v Su, Lakatamia pursued two claims against the defendants, Mr Su and his mother, Madam Su, including: unlawful means conspiracy—alleging a concerted plan to harm Lakatamia by unlawful means, through breaches of a 2011 worldwide freezing order in related Commercial Court proceedings against Mr Su (the Blair Freezing Order), by procuring the dissipation of two of Mr Son’s assets: the net sale proceeds...

Information sharing is a common commercial practice that can enhance transparency around pricing and other commercially sensitive data and, in some cases, deliver efficiencies. Nonetheless, information exchange is increasingly pursued as an anti-competitive behaviour. Simultaneously, it remains one of the most difficult areas for the application of competition law. Illustrative conduct includes alleged price signalling, exchanging information and bid-rigging, unilateral disclosure of pricing intentions, indirect exchanges, sharing via an intermediary, information exchange in initial public offerings and share placings, or exchanges between merging parties. This Practice Note examines how the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), alongside sectoral regulators, applies the Chapter I prohibition of the Competition Act 1998 (CA 1998) to agreements and concerted practices involving information exchange. For an EU competition law perspective, see Practice Note: Information exchange under EU competition law. Framework for the assessment of information exchanges In order to find an infringement of the Chapter I prohibition of CA 1998, the CMA must establish that: the parties entered into an...

Vertical agreements Under section 2(1) of the Competition Act 1998 (CA 98), vertical agreements are banned. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC Act) has revised the language in section 2 so that, in specified situations, it captures arrangements carried out beyond the UK. The prohibition covers agreements between undertakings, concerted practices, and decisions of associations of undertakings that have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the UK, or any part of it, and which may influence trade in the UK or a part of it where such agreements, decisions or practices are implemented, or intended to be implemented, in the UK. In all other instances, the ban extends to conduct likely to have an immediate, substantial and foreseeable impact on trade within the UK or a part of the UK. In addition, section 2(3) CA 98 requires that an agreement is implemented, or intended to be implemented, in the UK. As indicated above, the DMCC Act adjusts the scope...