Competition And Markets Authority v Martin

Competition And Markets Authority v Martin

Mr Martin was aware of, and failed to prevent, Berrymans' participation in a cartel to fix minimum commission fees, breaching competition law. His conduct as a director fell below the standards required, making him unfit to be concerned in the management of a company. The statutory scheme requires a mandatory disqualification order, and proportionality is achieved through the right to apply for leave to act. There are no extenuating circumstances to alter this conclusion.

Parties
Claimant: Competition and Markets Authority; Defendant: Michael Christopher Martin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Director Disqualification (competition Law) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Director disqualification order granted against Mr Martin for 7 years.
Legal Topics
Director Disqualification, Cartel Conduct, Anti Competitive Agreements, Competition Act 1998, Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
Competition Law Company Law Director Disqualification Cartel Conduct Anti Competitive Agreements Competition Act 1998 Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Competition and Markets Authority

Claimant

Michael Christopher Martin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Director Disqualification (competition Law) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Martin's conduct as a director made him unfit to be concerned in the management of a company under section 9A of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 due to anti-competitive cartel activity.
  2. 2 Whether a disqualification order is mandatory or subject to proportionality under Article 8 ECHR.

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Martin was aware of, and failed to prevent, Berrymans' participation in a cartel to fix minimum commission fees, breaching competition law. His conduct as a director fell below the standards required, making him unfit to be concerned in the management of a company. The statutory scheme requires a mandatory disqualification order, and proportionality is achieved through the right to apply for leave to act. There are no extenuating circumstances to alter this conclusion.

Court Disposition

Director disqualification order granted against Mr Martin for 7 years.

Orders

  • Mr Martin is disqualified from acting as a director or being concerned in the management of a company for 7 years.
  • Mr Martin to pay an interim payment of £100,000 on account of costs within 28 days.