As part of the ongoing review of the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation and Guidelines, on 4 February 2022, DG COMP launched a two-week consultation regarding proposed guidance on information exchanges in dual distribution. The proposed new section provides much needed clarity and valuable additional guidance on the circumstances in which information exchange in a dual distribution context will not raise concerns. The Commission also appears to have dropped the proposed 10% market share threshold, which is very welcome as this will materially reduce complexity and uncertainty.
Euclid Law’s response is available here.
Response to the Public Consultation by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Proposals on Markets and Merger Control Jurisdiction
Euclid Law Ltd
We are submitting this paper from the position of practitioners who strongly believe that consumers, businesses and practitioners benefit from rational, predictable and up to date competition and consumer law regimes. The views stated are our own and do not necessarily represent the views of any client of our firm.
While the Government’s reform proposals are extremely wide-ranging, we have focused this response on the two areas where the proposed changes cause us most concern, namely the markets and merger control regimes.
[…] The Government’s consultation looks at strengthening the somewhat unique feature of market investigations. This allows the CMA to impose remedies in markets where there is no evidence of wrongdoing. It is essentially the exercise of a Ministerial power delegated to the CMA, enabling the CMA to regulate parts of the economy without any Ministerial or Parliamentary involvement. Few other competition authorities enjoy such wide-ranging powers. The flipside of that coin is that the process involves a lengthy and rigorous review by independent Panel Members, only at the end of which remedies can be imposed – so-called “Market Investigation References”. The Panel Members are part-time and are independent of the CMA and its Board. It is that independence that is seen as an integral part of the system.
While the CMA has the ability to conduct Market Studies without a full market investigation (and thus without the involvement of independent Panel Members), it lacks the power to impose a binding remedy in such cases. If the CMA wishes to impose remedies, the only option is for the Board of the CMA to refer the matter to an independent Panel for a market investigation. Of course, the CMA already has other options available to it short of imposing remedies, such as seeking voluntary undertakings from market participants in lieu of a reference or making recommendations for others to take action (including other regulatory bodies or Government).
Download and read the full response here.