The following Competition practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
Generally, agreements that have either the object or effect of restricting, distorting or preventing competition are prohibited.
Agreements with an anti-competitive object are those that are particularly high risk and are presumed to have a negative impact on markets—because of their seriousness, there is no need to prove that there is an actual negative effect on competition.
The meaning of what is the object of an agreement has been one of the most debated points in competition law, with a long line of case law dating back to 1966. The test to determine whether an agreement has an anti-competitive object has been interpreted widely, meaning that many agreements will fall within the test, even where it appears that the parties did not intend to do so.
The reason why the test has been interpreted widely is historic. Prior to 2004, only the European Commission could apply the exemption in Article 101(3) TFEU to agreements. Therefore, Article 101(1) TFEU and the object test existed solely to determine when the Commission had jurisdiction. Case law was developed to clarify this jurisdictional question and provide an easy test to apply. However, when Regulation 1/2003 (the Modernisation Regulation) entered into force in 2004, the sole competence of the Commission to apply Article 101(3) TFEU was swept away, with all competition authorities and courts in EU Member States being given the power
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note covers the legal framework and regulatory guidance to be considered in determining whether an arrangement constitutes a contract of insurance and the possible consequences of carrying on activities relating to a contract of insurance without the requisite regulatory permissionsThe
The principles of the notarial act are that it is:•an act of the notary and not of the parties named in the document•a record of a fact, event or transaction•in the form of a document, notwithstanding the form of the underlying document, fact, event or transactionThe purpose of the notarial act is
You may apply simplified customer due diligence (SDD) measures in relation to particular business relationships or transactions which you determine present a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, having taken into account:•your organisation-wide risk assessment—see Practice Note:
LiabilityFalse imprisonment consists of the complete deprivation of liberty without a lawful basis. Claims will in practice be made against a public body that exercises detention powers, usually a local police force, the Secretary of State for the Home Department or the Secretary of State for
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.