½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

View the related checklists about Cartels

What to think about before bringing a private competition action—checklist

What to think about before bringing a private competition action—checklist Is there an actionable claim? Note: private competition actions remain largely regulated by national law and procedural and substantive rules across the EU may vary significantly, therefore assessments in individual jurisdictions will need to be made when planning competition litigation. Possible causes of action • Consider if there is an infringement of UK competition law (or EU competition law prior to the end of the Brexit transition period). ◦ Consider whether the loss suffered can be attributed to an agreement or concerted action between undertakings, especially competing undertakings (see further, The prohibition on restrictive agreements). ◦ Consider whether the loss might have been caused by an entity that is arguably dominant typically with a large share of a relevant market, and could be said to have abused its dominance contrary to Chapter II of the Competition Act 1998 (and/or Article 102 TFEU if prior to the end of the Brexit transition period) (see further, The prohibition on abuse of dominance)....

View the related practice notes about Cartels

Singapore behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker

Singapore behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker This table summarises all completed investigations by Singapore’s competition authority (the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore—the CCCS) into alleged cartels, anti-competitive agreements and abuses of dominant positions since 2018. Note—only investigations that have been made public are included in this table. 2025 Investigations under section 34 of the Competition Act Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Contracting• Trust-Build Engineering & Construction Pte. Ltd• Hunan Fengtian Construction Group Co. Ltd Restrictive agreement—bid rigging • Infringement decision issued—23/05/2025; fines totalling $4.6m imposed Investigations under section 47 of the Competition Act Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments The CCCS has not yet issued any decisions under section 47 in 2025 2024 Investigations under section 34 of the Competition Act Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Remittance services• ZGR Global Pte Ltd• Hanshan Money Express Pte. Ltd Restrictive agreement—information exchange • Infringement decision issued—25/11/2024; fines TBC Interior fit-out construction services for non-residential properties• Tarkus Interiors Pte...

Türkiye behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker

Türkiye behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker This table summarises all completed investigations by Türkiyes competition authority (the Turkish Competition Authority—the TCA) into alleged cartels, anti-competitive agreements and abuses of dominant positions since 2018. Note—only investigations that have been made public are included in this table. 2025 Investigations under Article 4 of Law No. 4054 Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Production and sale of cement and ready-mixed concrete• Batıbeton Sanayi AŞ• Öztürk Ticaret • Şölen Çimento Yapı İnş. San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti• Çimentaş İzmir Çimento Fabrikası Türk AŞ  Restrictive agreements—price fixing and customer allocation • Infringement decision announced—27/05/2025; fines totalling TRY 42,401,366 imposed Elevator maintenance• 14 undertakings (listed here) Restrictive agreements—price fixing and customer allocation •Infringement decision announced—28/01/25; fines totalling TRY 418,391 imposed 2024 Investigations under Article 4 of Law No. 4054 Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Cleaning products• Viking Kağıt ve Selüloz Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ Restrictive agreements—RMP •Settlement agreement reached—13/11/2024; fines totalling TRY 9,073,292 imposed Private education• 18...

View the related precedents about Cartels

Competition law compliance—post-training assessment answers

Competition law compliance—post-training assessment answers Question Correct answer 1. Competition law protects business and consumers from anti-competitive behaviour, and safeguards effective competition True 2. What are the consequences of breaching competition law? Heavy fines, prison sentences, director disqualifications, and reputational damage. 3. What are the three main contexts in which competition law may become an issue for commercial organisations? Cartels, abuse of dominant position and other anti-competitive agreements 4. Would an organisation that has substantial market power over a period of time be classified as being in a dominant

Message from CEO on introduction of competition law compliance policy

Message from CEO on introduction of competition law compliance policy Date: [insert date] From: [Insert name and job title] Competing fairly benefits both businesses and consumers. Competition shows companies where they need to improve and encourages organisations to strive for greater efficiency, become more innovative, more productive, and ultimately be better businesses. Competition law is designed to protect businesses and consumers from anti-competitive behaviour, and safeguard effective competition. All businesses must comply with competition law and there can be serious consequences for businesses and individuals, including directors, for non-compliance, including heavy fines, prison sentences, director disqualifications and reputational damage. 1 What is competition law compliance? Competition law is designed to protect businesses and consumers from anti-competitive behaviour, and safeguard effective competition in the markets in which they operate. All businesses must comply with competition law and there can be serious consequences for businesses and individuals for non-compliance, including heavy fines, prison sentences, director disqualifications and reputational damage. 2 How does this affect us? Competition law may become...

View the related q&as about Cartels

Can a sole company director be convicted of aiding and abetting an underage sale of tobacco offence of an employee, if the regulatory offence does not contain a corporate liability provision and the director took insufficient precautions to prevent such sales?

Can a sole company director be convicted of aiding and abetting an underage sale of tobacco offence of an employee, if the regulatory offence does not contain a corporate liability provision and the director took insufficient precautions to prevent such sales? It is an offence under section 7(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (CYPA 1933) to sell tobacco to a person under the age of 18. This is an offence of strict liability (St Helens MBC v Hill . See Practice Notes:Prohibitions on the sale of tobacco and nicotine inhaling products and Strict liability. CYPA 1933, s 7(1) imposes liability on ‘any person’ who sells tobacco to a person under the age of 18. ‘Person’ includes a body of persons corporate or unincorporate (Schedule 1 to the Interpretation Act 1978). This liability can extend to employers, including a company, under the principle of vicarious liability, which applies to strict liability offences like this one (see Mousell Bros Ltd v London and North-Western Rly Co and London...

Is the offence of selling illegal vapes under the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507 a summary or either way offence and if so would a time limit apply to bring the offence?

Is the offence of selling illegal vapes under the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507 a summary or either way offence and if so would a time limit apply to bring the offence? The Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507, reg 48 lists the offences created by the Regulations. These include: • breaches of the obligations contained in Part 2 on labelling • breaches of the obligations contained in Part 3 on emissions, additives etc with the exception of Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507, reg 14(3) • breach of Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507, reg 27 on reporting obligations • failure to submit information to the Secretary of State in accordance with a provision of Part 4(reporting about tobacco products) or Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507, reg 29 (ingredients information for herbal products for smoking) • breaches of Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016, SI 2016/507, reg 28 (labelling and presentation of herbal products for smoking) or...

View the related News about Cartels

UK Competition law—daily round-up (03/06/2025)

A round-up of UK competition law developments, including publication of two SIs regarding the UK’s subsidy control regime.

International Trade Court strikes down Trump's tariffs

Law360, London: The International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give the president the ‘unbounded authority’ to impose tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world, the US Court of International Trade ruled on 29 May 2025, handing a win to small businesses and states challenging some of President Donald Trump's steep tariffs.