Competition Act 1998
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
SCHEDULE 1 Exclusions: Mergers and Concentrations
Sections 3(1)(a) and 19(1)(a). Part I Mergers Enterprises ceasing to be distinct: the Chapter I prohibition 1 (1) To the extent to which an agreement (either on its own or when taken together with another agreement) results, or if carried out would result, in any two enterprises ceasing to be distinct enterprises for the purposes of Part V of the Fair Trading Act 1973 (“the 1973 Act”) Part 3 of the Enterprise Act 2002 (“the 2002 Act”), the Chapter I prohibition does not apply to the agreement. (2) The exclusion provided by sub-paragraph (1) extends to any provision directly related and necessary to the implementation of the merger provisions. (3) In sub-paragraph (2) “merger provisions” means the provisions of the agreement which cause, or if carried out would cause, the agreement to have the result mentioned in sub-paragraph (1). (4) Section 65 of the 1973 Act Section 26 of the 2002 Act applies for the purposes of this paragraph as if— (a) in subsection (3) (circumstances in which a person or group of persons may be treated as having control of an enterprise), and (b) in subsection (4) (circumstances in which a person or group of persons may be treated as bringing an enterprise under their control), for “may” there were substituted “ must ”. Enterprises ceasing to be distinct: the Chapter II prohibition 2 (1) To the extent to which conduct (either on its own or when taken together with other conduct)— (a) results in any two enterprises ceasing to be distinct enterprises for the purposes of Part V of the 1973 Act Part 3 of the 2002 Act), or (b) is directly related and necessary to the attainment of the result mentioned in paragraph (a), the Chapter II prohibition does not apply to that conduct. (2) Section 65 of the 1973 Act Section 26 of the 2002 Act applies for the purposes of this paragraph as it applies for the purposes of paragraph 1. Transfer of a newspaper or of newspaper assets 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Withdrawal of the paragraph 1 exclusion 4 (1) The exclusion provided by paragraph 1 does not apply to a particular agreement if the CMA gives a direction under this paragraph to that effect. (2) If the CMA is considering whether to give a direction under this paragraph, it may by notice in writing require any party to the agreement in question to give the CMA such information in connection with the agreement as it may require. (3) The CMA may give a direction under this paragraph only as provided in sub-paragraph (4) or (5). (4) If at the end of such period as may be specified in rules under section 51 a person has failed, without reasonable excuse, to comply with a requirement imposed under sub-paragraph (2), the CMA may give a direction under this paragraph. (5) The CMA may also give a direction under this paragraph if— (a) it considers that the agreement will, if not excluded, infringe the Chapter I prohibition; and (b) the agreement is not a protected agreement. (6) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (5), an individual exemption is unconditional if no conditions or obligations are imposed in respect of it under section 4(3)(a). (7) A direction under this paragraph— (a) must be in writing; (b) may be made so as to have effect from a date specified in the direction (which may not be earlier than the date on which it is given). Protected agreements 5 An agreement is a protected agreement for the purposes of paragraph 4 if— (a) the CMA or (as the case may be) the Secretary of State has published its or his decision not to make a reference ... under section 22, 33, 45 or 62 of the 2002 Act in connection with the agreement; (b) the CMA or (as the case may be) the Secretary of State has made a reference ... under section 22, 33, 45 or 62 of the 2002 Act in connection with the agreement and the CMA has found that the agreement has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, a relevant merger situation or (as the case may be) a special merger situation; (c) the agreement does not fall within paragraph (a) or (b) but has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, enterprises to which it relates being regarded under section 26 of the 2002 Act as ceasing to be distinct enterprises (otherwise than as the result of subsection (3) or (4)(b) of that section); or (d) the CMA has made a reference ... under section 32 of the Water Industry Act 1991 in connection with the agreement and the CMA has found that the agreement has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, a merger of any two or more water enterprises of the kind to which that section applies.
SCHEDULE 1 Exclusions: Mergers and Concentrations
Sections 3(1)(a) and 19(1)(a). Part I Mergers Enterprises ceasing to be distinct: the Chapter I prohibition 1 (1) To the extent to which an agreement (either on its own or when taken together with another agreement) results, or if carried out would result, in any two enterprises ceasing to be distinct enterprises for the purposes of Part V of the Fair Trading Act 1973 (“the 1973 Act”) Part 3 of the Enterprise Act 2002 (“the 2002 Act”), the Chapter I prohibition does not apply to the agreement. (2) The exclusion provided by sub-paragraph (1) extends to any provision directly related and necessary to the implementation of the merger provisions. (3) In sub-paragraph (2) “merger provisions” means the provisions of the agreement which cause, or if carried out would cause, the agreement to have the result mentioned in sub-paragraph (1). (4) Section 65 of the 1973 Act Section 26 of the 2002 Act applies for the purposes of this paragraph as if— (a) in subsection (3) (circumstances in which a person or group of persons may be treated as having control of an enterprise), and (b) in subsection (4) (circumstances in which a person or group of persons may be treated as bringing an enterprise under their control), for “may” there were substituted “ must ”. Enterprises ceasing to be distinct: the Chapter II prohibition 2 (1) To the extent to which conduct (either on its own or when taken together with other conduct)— (a) results in any two enterprises ceasing to be distinct enterprises for the purposes of Part V of the 1973 Act Part 3 of the 2002 Act), or (b) is directly related and necessary to the attainment of the result mentioned in paragraph (a), the Chapter II prohibition does not apply to that conduct. (2) Section 65 of the 1973 Act Section 26 of the 2002 Act applies for the purposes of this paragraph as it applies for the purposes of paragraph 1. Transfer of a newspaper or of newspaper assets 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Withdrawal of the paragraph 1 exclusion 4 (1) The exclusion provided by paragraph 1 does not apply to a particular agreement if the CMA gives a direction under this paragraph to that effect. (2) If the CMA is considering whether to give a direction under this paragraph, it may by notice in writing require any party to the agreement in question to give the CMA such information in connection with the agreement as it may require. (3) The CMA may give a direction under this paragraph only as provided in sub-paragraph (4) or (5). (4) If at the end of such period as may be specified in rules under section 51 a person has failed, without reasonable excuse, to comply with a requirement imposed under sub-paragraph (2), the CMA may give a direction under this paragraph. (5) The CMA may also give a direction under this paragraph if— (a) it considers that the agreement will, if not excluded, infringe the Chapter I prohibition; and (b) the agreement is not a protected agreement. (6) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (5), an individual exemption is unconditional if no conditions or obligations are imposed in respect of it under section 4(3)(a). (7) A direction under this paragraph— (a) must be in writing; (b) may be made so as to have effect from a date specified in the direction (which may not be earlier than the date on which it is given). Protected agreements 5 An agreement is a protected agreement for the purposes of paragraph 4 if— (a) the CMA or (as the case may be) the Secretary of State has published its or his decision not to make a reference ... under section 22, 33, 45 or 62 of the 2002 Act in connection with the agreement; (b) the CMA or (as the case may be) the Secretary of State has made a reference ... under section 22, 33, 45 or 62 of the 2002 Act in connection with the agreement and the CMA has found that the agreement has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, a relevant merger situation or (as the case may be) a special merger situation; (c) the agreement does not fall within paragraph (a) or (b) but has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, enterprises to which it relates being regarded under section 26 of the 2002 Act as ceasing to be distinct enterprises (otherwise than as the result of subsection (3) or (4)(b) of that section); or (d) the CMA has made a reference ... under section 32 of the Water Industry Act 1991 in connection with the agreement and the CMA has found that the agreement has given rise to, or would if carried out give rise to, a merger of any two or more water enterprises of the kind to which that section applies.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.