header-logo header-logo

BSkyB is loser in spat over ITV

29 January 2010
Issue: 7402 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Commission’s recommendation to reduce shareholding upheld

The Court of Appeal has dismissed BSkyB’s legal challenge to the Competition Commission’s findings over its share in ITV but upheld the Commission’s conclusion on media plurality.

The Competition Commission found BSkyB’s acquisition of 17.9% of ITV’s issued share capital in 2006 would result in an expected “lessening of competition” and recommended it reduce its holding to below 7.5%. This would satisfy the so-called “media plurality” issue, by which there should be sufficient numbers of people with control of media enterprises to guard against dominance by one person.

BSkyB’s share offer had acted as a “spoiler” on an earlier bid for ITV by Virgin Media, at a lower share price. Virgin’s offer was worth about £1.22 per share while BSkyB offered £1.35.

In BSkyB v Virgin (British Sky Broadcasting Group plc v Competition Commission and others; Virgin Media Inc v Competition Commission and others) [2010] EWCA Civ 2, [2010] All ER (D) 130 (Jan), Lord Justice Lloyd upheld the Commission’s findings on curbing BSkyB’s shares holdings.
As regards dominance in the media, Lloyd LJ said: “what was required [to satisfy the media plurality issue] was not just an exercise of counting heads, and that it was proper and necessary to have regard to the actual degree of control exercised by one enterprise over another.”

Later in his judgment, he said: “when it comes to assessing the plurality of the aggregate number of relevant controllers and to considering the sufficiency of that plurality, the Commission may, and should, take into account the actual extent of the control exercised and exercisable over a relevant enterprise by another, whether it is a case of deemed control resulting from material influence under section 26 or rather one of actual common ownership or control.”

 

Issue: 7402 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll