Delayed UK antitrust case underscores compliance, reputational risks

Antitrust infringement cases in the United Kingdom can run on for years, but there’s a question whether issuing fines that are dwarfed by the revenues of those organisations involved is a worthy deterrent—particularly if they are imposed over a decade after the misconduct ended. It’s also debatable whether the first company to admit that it has been part of a cartel for years should get away scot-free if it agrees to turn over all the dirt on the other members.

Competition infringement cases are notoriously difficult to investigate in the UK, let alone prosecute. Inquiries are complex; they can span multiple jurisdictions for misconduct that took place over several years, and they require forensic analysis of vast volumes of electronic documents to build a case. There’s also the reality that companies don’t always respond quickly to information requests. Sometimes this is for legitimate reasons (for example, internal strategy discussions), but sometimes a slow response is done tactically: Why should companies give prosecutors more rope to hang them with?

Money is also a big part of the problem—investigations are expensive, and large companies typically have more resources for legal services than the government agencies investigating them.