Tristan is regularly engaged in EU and competition matters, both commercial and regulatory. He has advised on the application of competition law in commercial, employment and sports contexts. Tristan is the manager of Competition Bulletin, a blog on competition law. He has advised on European law relating to audiovisual services, financial services, employment, and social security. Tristan has experience of telecommunications law in the CAT and the Court of Appeal. Tristan’s two-year graduate degree at Harvard University focused on Economics and Human Rights. Tristan has taught human rights policy as assistant to Professor Michael Ignatieff.
407
Merricks v MasterCard: Collective Actions Reinvigorated* The Court of Appeal today gave its much-anticipated judgment in the application to bring collective proceedings against MasterCard: see Merricks v MasterCard Incorporated and others [2019] EWCA Civ 674. It is a major victory for the (...)
62
Can several wrongs make a right? Gallaher v CMA in the Court of Appeal*When a public body makes a mistake in its treatment of one person, can fairness require it to treat other people in the same way – even if that means amplifying the effects of the mistake?According to the Court of Appeal in (...)
99
Asset acquisitions and mergers: Eurotunnel in the Supreme Court*The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Eurotunnel II ([2015] UKHL 75) brings some much-needed clarity to what was becoming a rather opaque corner of the UK merger regime. It also contains statements of general principle which are (...)
123
Standalone claims in the CAT: bypassing the transitional rules* We have written before about the problems inherent in the transitional provisions of the new Consumer Rights Act 2015 (see Tom de la Mare QC’s blog here). A recent decision from Mr Justice Barling in the Mastercard litigation (...)
136
Settling cartel damages actions: contribution defendants beware* Anyone who has ever tried to settle a cartel damages case will know that the law relating to settlements is fraught with difficulty. The recent judgment of the High Court in IMI Plc v Delta Ltd [2015] EWHC 1676 (Ch) highlights (...)
249
Asset acquisitions revisited* Earlier this year, I suggested that the law on when an asset acquisition might amount to a merger was somewhat opaque. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Eurotunnel II [2015] EWCA Civ 487 has brought some additional clarity, although the messy procedural history of (...)
107
Recovering penalties from directors and employees: Safeway revisited* Can a company which has been fined for anticompetitive conduct seek to recover the fine from the directors and employees responsible by suing them for damages? The question is moot in light of last week’s Supreme Court (...)
132
Eurotunnel: when buying assets is a merger* When is an asset acquisition a merger? As the Eurotunnel litigation shows, the answer is not clear-cut. The background is the 2011 liquidation of the cross-channel ferry company SeaFrance. It could not be sold as a going concern, so instead there (...)
621
Skyscanner: CAT quashes commitments in the online booking sector* In a judgment handed down on Friday, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has quashed the Office of Fair Trading’s decision to accept commitments in the online hotel booking sector. As the first case to consider such commitments, (...)
89
Non-Appealing Cartelists Beware* Tucked away at the back of last week’s Supreme Court decision on time-limits for follow-on claims is a very important development for private competition actions. The context is section 47A of the Competition Act 1998, a provision which has generated an (...)
52
Tobacco decision: the Court of Appeal emphasises finality* The Court of Appeal yesterday delivered a judgment that should finally draw a line under one of the Office of Fair Trading’s more troublesome cases – and which will presumably bring a great sigh of relief from the Competition and Markets (...)
126
Canadian Supreme Court: No such thing as passing on defence* On Thursday last week the Supreme Court of Canada handed down three much-anticipated judgments concerning indirect purchaser claims. The trio of cases point towards a distinctive, and in many respects more claimant-friendly, approach (...)
128
The Competition Commission’s power to block transactions outside the UK* The judgment in Akzo Nobel NV v Competition Commission [2013] CAT 13 is an important decision on the ability of the Competition Commission (“CC”) to block transactions between companies outside of the UK. However, neither (...)
47
UK government proposes “streamlining” regulatory and competition appeals* The UK government on 19 June 2013 published a consultation on streamlining regulatory and competition appeals. The press spin was that the proposals are all about preventing “armies of lawyers” from blocking (...)
124
Private enforcement: the Commission speaks at last* The trio of documents published by the Commission last week mark an important moment in private competition enforcement in the EU. After years of debate and consultation, it is now clear that, whilst the Commission is determined to take some (...)
174
Albion v Dwr Cymru: Incompetence and counterfactuals* The Competition Appeal Tribunal today delivered that rarest of beasts: a judgment awarding damages in a follow-on claim. After its decade-long fight, Albion Water has been awarded around £2 million for Dŵr Cymru’s abuse of dominant position in (...)
44
The OFT’s tobacco decision: Is it dead yet?* Late in 2011, the Office of Fair Trading was forced to concede before the Competition Appeal Tribunal that it could no longer defend the theory of harm contained in its Decision on alleged pricing agreements between tobacco manufacturers and (...)
65
Collective Actions: loss in complex cases* The big news from last week’s UK announcement on reforming private competition enforcement is that the government plans to introduce opt-out class actions for competition claims. The proposals incorporate various “safeguards” designed to ensure that the (...)
109
Tesco scores partial victory in cheese cartel* In a judgment handed down this afternoon, the Competition Appeal Tribunal largely upheld Tesco’s appeal against the OFT’s decision that it had participated in unlawful agreements relating to the price of cheese: see Tesco Stores Ltd v Office of Fair (...)
73
BCL No.2: The Supreme Court addresses time limits in follow-on claims* The White Paper which first proposed follow-on damages claims promised a “swift” and “streamlined” procedure. The idea was that when a regulator had made an infringement finding, there would be a simple way for victims to claim (...)
141
Supreme Court puts brake on “Euro defences”* The UK Supreme Court has given trade mark proprietors reason to celebrate, in a judgment which is likely to have important consequences for the success of “Euro defences” more broadly. See: Oracle America Inc (formerly Sun Microsystems Inc) v M-Tech (...)
150
Ex ante and ex post regulation following Telefónica* Hats off to Spain for having the nerve to suggest that it might have been a better target for the Commission’s attention than Telefónica, the former monopoly telecoms provider recently fined over €150 million for committing a margin squeeze in (...)
68 rue Amelot
106 West 32nd Street, Suite 144
New York, NY, 10001, USA
