header-logo header-logo

Spotlight on directors

23 September 2010 / Rod Lambert , Christopher Reekie
Issue: 7434 / Categories: Features , Company , Practice areas
printer mail-detail

Rod Lambert & Christopher Reekie revisit Directors’ Disqualification Orders

Where a company is alleged to have breached competition law rules, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) may bring an action seeking to disqualify directors of that company from acting as a director for a period of up to 15 years, if their actions, either by act or omission, have in some way contributed to the alleged breach. In recently published guidance, the OFT has further explained how it will approach director disqualification proceedings. Companies and directors should pay close attention to this latest clarification of the UK competition regulator’s armoury. Failure to take note could have serious consequences.

Background

On 29 June 2010, the OFT published new guidance, which clarifies the powers of the OFT under the Competition Disqualification Order (CDO) provisions of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, as amended by the Enterprise Act 2002 (CDDA). The Guidance sets out the general approach that the OFT will adopt in seeking CDOs against individual directors, their professional advisors and professional associations. 

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll