Law firms warn against the expansion of the powers of the OFT
Concerned by fusion of the OFT with the Competition Commission has raised to scope of application of the new authority of enforcement powers.?Photo: Alamy
In a document of the Department for business, the city of London Law Society presents three major concerns about the planned new competition regime, the centrepiece of the proposed merger of the OFT with the Competition Commission.
Society, whose members include Norton Rose, Clifford Chance, Allen & Overy, slaughter and may agree that a single authority would bring efficiency gains, but he wished to ensure that the Government retains some of the benefits of a system at two levels, such as having a "new pair of eyes" to examine a case.
Michael Grenfell, a partner at Norton Rose, said: "it is important that you do not have the same people who started the survey giving judgment on it, just as you would like make a police providing the verdict on a flight officer."
The company recommends that the "ultimate decision-making" should rest with a new "Executive panel", "independent spirit persons", who played no role in the investigation. Companies would be allowed to submit observations to the Commission before that it had taken the final decision as they do today to the commission.
A second concern is over the enlarged community, enforcement powers to fine companies - such as the 112 million penalty of £ handed over to Imperial Tobacco - or exclude principals for infringement of competition law.
The company pointed out how the OFT investigates an offence alleged, continues the alleged violation via a statement of objections, namely rules if it actually occurred after the performances of the company and levies sanction.
"The OFT is all." "It is investigator, Prosecutor, judge and a jury", said Dr. Grenfell. "We believe that that is consistent with modern principles of fairness and justice.
The company proposes instead a "clear separation between the investigation and continued on the one hand and another arbitration" - given that the United States Canada Australia, the Ireland.
Third concern of society is the proposal that all companies involved in a merger are obliged to alert the competition authority. At the present time, Britain allows companies to accept the risk if questions of competition - fusion knowing that, if the authorities decided, they could end up as forced sellers.
Dr. Grenfell said: "we believe that it imposes an unnecessary regulatory burden on business." They should have the possibility to take the risk. ?
The Government should publish a document for consultation in February on proposed reforms of the competition.
0 Response to "Law firms warn against the expansion of the powers of the OFT"
Post a Comment