Lindum et al v OFT

27 May 2014 | by George Peretz QC

You can’t have your cake and eat it: the High Court rules that defendants who do not appeal a penalty decision cannot then sue for their money back

My policy on cake is pro having it and pro eating it (Boris Johnson, Mayor of London)

Appealing a decision by the competition authorities is risky, time-consuming and expensive.  If a penalty is bearable, many addressees will be tempted to live with it and get back to running the business.  But if they don’t appeal, they don’t get the benefit if the decision is quashed or the penalty reduced.  Is there a “Boris” approach that allows an addressee not to appeal but to get the benefit if someone else appeals successfully?

Daniel Beard QC and Julian Gregory acted for the OFT

George Peretz acted for a number of parties in the Construction appeals and for an addressee of the Tobacco decision.