Interclass Holdings Ltd and another v Office of Fair Trading [2012] EWCA Civ 1056, [2012] All ER (D) 358 (Jul)
The correct approach to the assessment of penalty by the competition appeal tribunal was to proceed in stages, beginning with an initial assessment for each infringement having regard to its seriousness.
However, when considering whether that figure should be increased in order to give effect to the policy objective of deterrence, two factors came into play.
- The first was whether the amount of the step 1 penalty would act as a sufficient deterrent for the particular undertaking on which it was imposed.
- The second was whether it would be sufficient to deter others operating in the same field by bringing home to them that such conduct was illegal and would be effectively punished.
Although at step 1 the tribunal was calculating the penalty for each infringement, it was impossible at step 3 not to have some regard to the overall and cumulative level of penalty imposed on the undertaking when considering whether step 1 figures should be increased. That was a conventional approach to sentencing and was relevant
