News, Features and Opinion EditorSolicitors Journal

CMA overcomes legal challenge to medicine pricing fine

CMA overcomes legal challenge to medicine pricing fine

The Competition Appeal Tribunal upheld a decision by the Competition and Markets Authority to fine a pharmaceutical manufacturer £84 million for overcharging the NHS.

The tribunal found that the CMA's decision to fine Advanz for abusing its dominant position in the market for liothyronine tablets – an essential medicine to treat thyroid hormone deficiency – was correct in "all the main elements".

Advanz is the sole supplier of the tablets. According to the CMA, the company increased its prices by over 1,000 per cent, from £20 to £248 per pack, between 2009 and 2017. This resulted in an £84 million fine.

Michael Grenfell, executive director of enforcement at the CMA, said:

"We are delighted that the Competition Appeal Tribunal has unanimously upheld the CMA’s infringement findings. Today’s landmark judgment reinforces the need for companies to think carefully about how they set prices and paves the way for the NHS to seek compensation.

"The CMA will continue to crack down on companies which abuse their market power in ways that harm people and the wider economy."

In a press release on 8 August, the CMA said:

On 29 July 2021, the CMA found that Advanz’s excessive pricing constituted an abuse of its dominant position, in breach of competition law.

As a result of today’s judgment, Advanz Pharma (the current owner of the Advanz business) together with HgCapital and Cinven (2 former owners of the Advanz business) face a total fine of over £84 million for the relevant periods in which they broke the law. Further information on the CMA’s decision can be found in the final report published on the CMA website.

Advanz Pharma, Cinven, and HgCapital each appealed the CMA’s decision to the Competition Appeal Tribunal. They disputed that the prices charged for liothyronine tablets were excessive and unfair and sought to overturn the fines imposed by the CMA.

In a unanimous judgment, the Tribunal fully upheld the CMA’s finding that Advanz had abused its dominant position by charging excessive and unfair prices for liothyronine tablets between 2009 and 2017.

In particular, the Tribunal found that the price increases were part of a deliberate strategy to exploit the lack of regulatory or competitive constraints and resulted in a significant impact on the NHS. The Tribunal dismissed all of the appellants’ grounds of appeal on liability.

NHS annual spending on the tablets in 2006, the year before the implementation of the strategy, was £600,000, but by 2009 had increased to more than £2.3 million and jumped to more than £30 million by 2016.

AdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisement
Latest News

UN and coalition of NGOs write to Unilever to voice deep concern regarding victims of violence at Unilever tea plantation

Tue Sep 26 2023

Live Facial Recognition: How to Stay Within the Law

Tue Sep 26 2023

Ethics Institute launches taskforce to examine legal services to oligarchs and kleptocrats

Mon Sep 25 2023

Legal Departments See Higher Matter Volumes but Flat or Declining Budgets: Thomson Reuters 2023 Legal Department Operations Index

Mon Sep 25 2023

More Than 200 Employers Named And Shamed For Failing To Pay National Minimum Wage

Mon Sep 25 2023

Browne Jacobson collaborates with LGiU on report highlighting “critical” role of local government to hit net zero

Fri Sep 22 2023

BSB publishes new guidance on barristers’ conduct in non-professional life and on social media

Fri Sep 22 2023

The Chancery Lane Project expands to the USA

Thu Sep 21 2023

Delay in Final Report of the Infected Blood Inquiry

Thu Sep 21 2023
FeaturedNew report highlights the transformative effects of domestic abuse training on family lawyers
New report highlights the transformative effects of domestic abuse training on family lawyers
Asylum seekers stranded on Diego Garcia win challenge against return to Sri Lanka
Asylum seekers stranded on Diego Garcia win challenge against return to Sri Lanka
A solicitor’s stance on EDI in the workplace
A solicitor’s stance on EDI in the workplace
New UK data protection bill may lighten the burden for business
New UK data protection bill may lighten the burden for business
SJ Interview: Hannah Ambrose
SJ Interview: Hannah Ambrose
Whose human rights are more important, yours or mine?
Whose human rights are more important, yours or mine?