header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Competition law & e-commerce: change is coming?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
28 April 2021 / Dr Jing Wang
Issue: 7930 / Categories: Features , Competition , Commercial , Technology
printer mail-detail
47590
Restoring competition in the digital market is essential for enhancing consumers’ confidence in e-commerce, says Dr Jing Wang
  • The Competition and Markets Authority’s decision on ComparetheMarket.com’s breach of anti-competitive activities.
  • Wide ‘most-favoured nation’ (MFN) clauses and narrow MFN clauses.

‘Price comparison websites are excellent for consumers. They promote competition between providers, offer choice for customers, and make it easier for consumers to find the best bargains’: Michael Grenfell, the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) executive director for enforcement.

However, price comparison websites can also go in the opposite direction, which is what we witnessed in the case of dominant price website ComparetheMarket.com (part of the BGL Group). The UK CMA fined BGL (BGL (Holdings) Limited, BGL Group Ltd, BISL Ltd and Compare the Market Ltd) over £17.9m in November last year for breaching UK competition law by price-fixing and restricting competition in a thoroughly intriguing fashion. Instead of promoting competition in the insurance quote markets, ComparetheMarket.com was found to have restricted competition by imposing wide ‘most-favoured

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur under scrutiny
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
NLJ this week: Does dishonesty always mean strike-off?
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
NLJ this week: Potanin, prenups & privacy
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
NLJ this week: Malaysia’s arbitration overhaul
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
NLJ this week: Greed but no fraud in £1.4bn SKAT case
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll