header-logo header-logo

03 June 2010 / Malcolm Dowden , Saira Malik
Issue: 7420 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Age of prohibition

Competition law prohibition is to extend to land agreements, says Malcolm Dowden & Saira Malik

The Land Agreements Exclusion and Revocation Order 2004, which excluded land agreements from the operation of the Competition Act 1998, has been revoked subject to a transitional period up to 6 April 2011 to allow businesses to review their land agreements for compliance with competition laws.

The exclusion for land agreements.

The 1998 Act prohibits:
 

  • anti-competitive agreements (Ch 1); and
  • abuse of a dominant market position (Ch 2).

Agreements were excluded from the Ch 1 prohibition to the extent that they create, alter, transfer or terminate an interest in land on the grounds that they were unlikely to have an adverse effect on competition.

However, the Competition Commission’s April 2008 report on grocery retailing concluded that exclusivity arrangements and restrictive covenants (especially by the major grocery retailers) can create:

  • challenges for new entrants; and
  • difficulties for existing competitors intending to expand.

It concluded that the exclusion for land agreements entered into by those major grocery

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll