Ofcom and BT in-house teams win court battle against HSF client Sky
Ofcom and BT's in-house legal teams have won a Court of Appeal battle against Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) client Sky, after it was found that a 2012 decision to block the regulator from forcing a discount of Sky's sports channels was "inadequate"
February 18, 2014 at 06:30 AM
3 minute read
Ofcom and BT's in-house legal teams have won a Court of Appeal battle against Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) client Sky, after it was found that a 2012 decision to block the regulator from forcing a discount of Sky's sports channels was "inadequate".
Yesterday (17 February), LJ Aikens concurred with an appeal by BT, ordering the Competition Authority Tribunal (CAT) to re-examine its decision.
Aikens said the CAT did not properly investigate the level of discounts BSkyB supposedly gave to its rivals for its sports channels.
In 2010, Ofcom enforced a new pricing structure after accusing BskyB of abusing its position by not offering high discounts to rival networks. Sky and the Football Association Premier League rejected the decision, arguing Ofcom's move was beyond its regulatory jurisdiction.
"There remain significant, independent, competition concerns based on the rate- card price and penetration discount, as found by Ofcom in the statement," Aikens said in the judgement, calling on the CAT to pursue "further consideration, findings and conclusions".
The decision is a major victory for BT Legal, which instructed Monckton Chambers' Jon Turner QC and Gerry Facenna and Brick Court's Sarah Ford for the appeal.
Ofcom also decided not to instruct an external law firm, but turned to Blackstone's Dinah Rose QC and Jessica Boyd and Monckton's Josh Holmes.
Meanwhile, Herbert Smith Freehills instructed Brick Court's James Flynn QC and David Scannell and Monckton's Meredith Pickford.
Brick Court's Gerard Rothschild also took a role, instructed by Virgin's counsel Ashurst, while the chambers' Helen Davies QC and Richard Blakeley were called upon by DLA Piper on behalf of the Premier League.
"Ofcom welcomes the Court of Appeal's decision that the judgment of the CAT failed properly to consider Ofcom's findings that there was ineffective competition in the market," said a spokesman for the regulator.
"Ensuring fair and effective competition in the pay TV market has always been Ofcom's objective. Ofcom's 2010 decision that Sky must offer premium sports channels to other providers was designed to deliver choice and innovation to consumers through greater competition."
Sky said in a statement: "This does not alter in any way the CAT's fundamental findings, overturning Ofcom, that Sky engaged constructively with other distributors over the supply of its premium sports channels, and that Virgin Media is able to compete effectively with Sky on the basis of Sky's rate card prices."
Related events:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhat to Expect From Teresa Ribera, the EU‘s New Competition Commissioner
5 minute readEU Parliament Gives Blessing to New EU Competition Chief Ribera Rodríguez
2 minute readUK Competition Watchdog Greenlights Google’s $2B Anthropic Investment, Lawyers Weigh in
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250