Inter-brand competition meaning

This Checklist supports planning for a print marketing campaign. It concentrates on marketing-specific needs, excluding wider transactional matters (eg contract formation, distance selling). Scope includes targeting and placement, agency agreements, data protection, advertising compliance, and prize or price promotions. It also addresses conformity with the UK’s legislative and self-regulatory framework, notably the unfair commercial practices rules in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA 2024) and the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP Code). Print ads remain pivotal to big-brand activity, across billboards, posters, brochures, leaflets, newspapers and magazines. In the UK, print advertising is overseen through a blend of industry self-regulation and statute. For a wider briefing on the UK advertising environment, see Practice Note: Advertising law and regulation. See also: Advertising copy approval—checklist; Planning a digital marketing campaign—checklist. A third column is available to capture observations or remarks while working through the Checklist... Checklist Further information Notes (if any) Targeting and placement ...

In this issue: UK antitrust UK mergers UK private actions UK market studies UK subsidy control EU antitrust EU State aid EU digital markets LexTalk®Competition: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Caselex UK antitrust CAT holds Deckers breached the Chapter I prohibition concerning restrictions on the sale HOKA running shoe brand The CAT handed down its judgment in Up & Running (UK) Limited v Deckers UK Ltd, a damages action brought by Up and Running (UK) Limited (Up & Running) against Deckers UK Limited (Deckers), alleging an infringement of the Chapter I prohibition under the Competition Act 1998 in relation to the sale of the HOKA running shoe brand. The CAT found that Deckers infringed the Chapter I prohibition by restricting the sale of those running shoes. Background Up & Running operates a retail business focused on specialist running footwear and accessories. Deckers...

In this issue: UK mergers UK private actions UK market investigations EU antitrust EU State aid Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Competition: a Lexis®Nexis community New and updated content Caselex UK mergers The CMA has issued its final positions following reviews of three sets of merger remedies and a single market investigation order: discharge undertakings in lieu of reference from August 2011 linked to Acergy SA’s acquisition of Subsea 7 Inc discharge undertakings in lieu of reference from August 2008 relating to Home Retail Group plc’s purchase of 27 leasehold properties from Focus (DIY) Ltd discharge undertakings dating from February 2002 by Lloyds TSB Group plc concerning its acquisition of Abbey National plc revoke the Energy Market Investigation (ECOES/DES) Order 2016 The CMA determined that, due to changes in circumstances, all of the relevant remedies are no longer suitable and should therefore be released (for the undertakings)...

Private actions CAT issues collective proceedings orders brought by Commercial Interregional Card Claims I Limited and Commercial and Interregional Card Claims II Limited against Mastercard and Visa On 9 August 2024, the CAT granted collective proceedings orders in relation to applications under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998, advanced by Commercial and Interregional Card Claims I Limited (CICC I) and Commercial and Interregional Card Claims II Limited (CICC II), against each of Mastercard and Visa respectively (together, the defendants)...

CASE HUB ARCHIVED – this archived case hub records the position as at the decision of 4 February 2016; it is no longer maintained. See the timeline, commentary and related cases for further information Case facts Outline European Commission merger investigation into the proposed acquisition by Liberty Global of BASE Belgium (Case M.7637). The deal features horizontal and vertical overlaps within Belgium’s telecommunications market. Latest developments The Commission cleared the transaction, subject to commitments, on 4 February 2016. Under these commitments Liberty Global: will divest BASE’s 50% stake in Mobile Vikings, an MVNO that runs on BASE’s network, to Belgian broadcaster Medialaan transfer a portion of BASE’s customer base to Medialaan—BASE and Medialaan currently have an agreement under which BASE sells mobile services under the JIM Mobile brand, owned by Medialaan; Liberty Global will move JIM Mobile customers to Medialaan has entered into an agreement with Medialaan, granting it access to BASE’s mobile network on conditions that will allow it to...

CASE HUB—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 7 November 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further,timeline. Case facts Outline of Joined Cases C‑105/18 to C‑113/18, UNESA and Others v Administración General del Estado—several Spanish preliminary references sought guidance, among other matters, on whether Article 107(1) TFEU should be construed as meaning that the imposition of a hydraulic levy, like the measure at issue, to the disadvantage of hydroelectricity producers operating in river basins spanning more than one autonomous community, constitutes prohibited State aid. Latest developments On 7 November 2019, the Court of Justice handed down its judgment...

This Practice Note is chiefly intended for brands seeking to collaborate with social media influencers (or other talent) on targeted social marketing campaigns and advertising promotions in Canada... Applicable regulations, codes and guidelines In Canada, the relationship between influencers and brands is largely governed by the federal Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-3, together with relevant regulatory and industry guidance. The Act broadly prohibits representations that are false or misleading in a material respect. These misleading advertising provisions apply to influencer activity in the same way as any other marketing, and extend to statements made by influencers to the public. Under the Competition Act, the federal Competition Bureau oversees influencer marketing, including deciding what constitutes a ‘material connection’ between an influencer and a brand and the related disclosure obligations, which are discussed in detail below. The Competition Bureau may seek administrative remedies for misleading advertising as a civil offence, or pursue prosecution where misrepresentations are made knowingly or recklessly as a criminal offence. The criminal misleading advertising...