header-logo header-logo

Competition

29 April 2010
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Vodafone Ltd and others v British Telecommunications plc and another [2010] EWCA Civ 391, [2010] All ER (D) 113 (Apr)

Section 195(5) of the Communications Act 2003 referred to the power that the decision-maker would “otherwise have”. It could not sensibly be read as referring to the power that the decision-maker “would otherwise have had” at the time of the original decision.

The power under s 45 to set conditions in the first place was indisputably a power to set them with prospective, not retrospective, effect. The purpose of the conditions was to regulate the future behaviour of undertakings with significant market power in markets where there was a lack of effective competition. That was made clear both by the EU Directives that the 2003 Act implemented, and by the terms of the 2003 Act itself. The power under s 45(1) of the 2003 Act was to set conditions binding the persons to whom they were applied, and the evident intention was to bind them in respect of their future behaviour.

An appeal was not rendered ineffective by

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll