Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“What I spend on my yearly subscription, equals to a day's billable hours for me not to mention time efficiency and peace of mind.”

Jai Stern

Access all documents on Extraterritoriality

Extraterritoriality meaning

What does Extraterritoriality mean?
Extraterritoriality describes the application of UK or Irish competition law to conduct occurring outside the territory where it is implemented in, or has actual or foreseeable effects within, that territory (often called the implementation/effects doctrine). In the UK, the Competition Act 1998 and the Enterprise Act 2002 permit the Competition and Markets authority (and concurrent regulators) to investigate and sanction foreign-to-foreign agreements or abuse, and to review global mergers, where UK effects, implementation or share of supply/turnover tests are met. Claimants can bring private damages claims in the Competition Appeal Tribunal or the courts for losses suffered in the UK arising from such conduct. In Ireland, the Competition Act 2002 (as amended) and EU competition law (Articles 101 and 102 TFEU) allow the CCPC and the Irish courts to act where conduct affects trade and competition in Ireland, reflecting EU case law on implementation/effects. Usage is consistent across England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (a UK-wide regime), with local courts handling damages and enforcement as appropriate. The term is descriptive rather than statutorily defined, but its scope is shaped by legislation and case law. Practically, undertakings and claimants should expect investigations, remedies, fines and disclosure where overseas conduct impacts UK or...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Extraterritoriality

NEWS
EU AI Office’s role enforcing EU copyright via AI Act: training data transparency, text and data mining, extraterritoriality; implications for right holders, with UK policy vacuum and US litigation

Copyright owners are urging the EU’s new AI Office to act quickly so that OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Dall-E and other general-purpose AI systems comply with EU copyright rules when they trawl the internet for vast quantities of material to train foundation models. The EU’s AI Act, the world’s first comprehensive AI law, sets out specific duties to ensure foundation models observe Directive (EU) 2019/790, the Digital Single Market (DSM) Copyright Directive. Right holders notched a win in December 2023, when EU negotiators agreed to impose obligations on foundation models to honour copyright. The European Commission’s 2021 draft had omitted such safeguards, arguing the DSM Copyright Directive already addressed them. Even so, Members of the European Parliament pressed to include these requirements, especially after ChatGPT’s surge in popularity following its November 2022 launch. Copyright protection has become a pivotal global issue, with court battles pitting right holders against AI developers dominating headlines, including The New York Times and other publishers’ dispute with ChatGPT in the US, and Getty Images’ legal clash with...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Extraterritoriality

PRACTICE NOTES
Lao PDR Merger Control: Unimplemented 2015 Competition Law; Unclear Thresholds, Scope and Extraterritoriality; Anticipated Mandatory Suspensory Filing and 30-day Review

A conversation with David Fruitman, Regional Competition Counsel, and Kristy Newby, Country Managing Director, Lao PDR, at regional law firm DFDL Legal and Tax Services, on key issues on merger control in Laos Have there been any recent developments regarding the regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Laos? Although the Law on Competition (No. 60/NA, 14 July 2015) (the Competition Law) was adopted in December 2015 and a regulatory body was formed in October 2018, no implementing regulations have been promulgated to date, meaning the Competition Law is not presently being applied, notwithstanding the creation of the Business Competition Commission. Under the law, is the control test the same as the EU concept of ‘decisive influence’? If not, how does it differ and what is the position in relation to ‘minority (non-controlling) shareholdings’? Unclear...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Practical guide to Tajikistan merger control: thresholds, extraterritoriality, notifications, suspensory requirements, review timetable and penalties under the 2017 Competition Law

A discussion with Nurlan Kyshtobaev, partner and head of Tajikistan practice, and Bahodur Nurov, senior associate at regional law firm GRATA Law Firm, on key issues in merger control in Tajikistan NOTE – to check whether notification thresholds in Tajikistan and worldwide are met, see Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the merger control regime in Tajikistan and are any updates or developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Tajikistan? Competition and merger oversight in Tajikistan is primarily governed by the Law on the Protection of Competition No. 1417 (the Competition Law), enacted on 30 May 2017. Since its adoption, no material new developments have occurred. Nevertheless, aspects of the statute create certain risks, notably around extraterritorial application. Consequently, the Antitrust Authority could prohibit particular transactions even where there is no direct effect on Tajikistan’s markets. We are not aware of any forthcoming revisions or changes to the Competition Law. 2. Under Tajik...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Fraudulent trading in liquidation and administration (Insolvency Act 1986 ss 213 and 246ZA): parties, elements, procedure, remedies, recoveries, extraterritoriality and limitation

A fraudulent trading claim can proceed via two distinct statutory avenues: it constitutes a criminal offence under section 993 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) a civil remedy is available under sections 213 and 246ZA of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) This Practice Note addresses the latter. What is fraudulent trading? Fraudulent trading is a cause of action under IA 1986, s 213 (liquidation) or IA 1986, s 246ZA (administration), aimed at recouping value for the company's estate where: the company has been placed into winding up or entered administration, and any part of its business was conducted with intent to defraud the company's creditors or the creditors of any other person, or for a fraudulent purpose In such circumstances, mere negligence or incompetence does not suffice. Who can commence a fraudulent trading claim? Historically, only a liquidator could issue a fraudulent trading claim. However, from 1 October 2015 both...

Read More Right Arrow