Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 DECEMBER 2010

The Tricky Problem of Professor Moizer and Apparent Bias

Both the Competition Commission and interested observers are likely to remember 2009 as a particularly difficult period for the CC. It was called an annus horribilis by some. By the end of that year, the CC had suffered three important defeats at the Competition Appeal Tribunal in remedies challenges related to the market investigation inquiries into groceries, payment protection insurance and airports.

United KingdomAntitrust/Competition Law
SJ Berwin'S EU & Competition Team
SJ Berwin'S EU & Competition Team

The Court of Appeal in the BAA case gives the Competition Commission a much-needed win on a vexed question

Both the Competition Commission and interested observers are likely to remember 2009 as a particularly difficult period for the CC. It was called an annus horribilis by some. By the end of that year, the CC had suffered three important defeats at the Competition Appeal Tribunal in remedies challenges related to the market investigation inquiries into groceries, payment protection insurance and airports. Whereas Tesco and Barclays Bank disputed the proportionality of remedies (and the CAT agreed with them and remitted key issues to the CC for reconsideration), the BAA challenge succeeded on an altogether different ground: the CAT accepted BAA's argument that a CC member, Professor Moizer, was afflicted by apparent bias.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from