This article was first published in the Solicitors Journal, August 2022 edition.
Sophie Lawrance and Manon Rattle discuss the Pfizer and Flynn v CMA  UKSC 14 judgment, highlighting the question should a competition authority pay the costs of a successful appeal against its decisions?
The UK Supreme Court (UKSC) recently confirmed that the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is not exempt from paying the costs of a successful appeal, in light of appeals brought by Pfizer and Flynn against a Court of Appeal judgment  (EWCA Civ 617). In so finding, it confirmed the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT) usual position that costs should be awarded to a party that successfully appeals a CMA infringement decision.
Sophie and Manon go on to explain the wider significance of this ruling as proven by the volume of interventions in the case, and of which, Bristows acted on one.
To read more on the background of this case, judgment, starting point, chilling effects and overall implications of this case decision, find the full article on the Solicitors Journal website. We discuss other competition law news on The CLIP Board.