This browser is not actively supported anymore. For the best passle experience, we strongly recommend you upgrade your browser.
| 1 minute read

Spreadex-Sporting Index: CMA requests that its own merger assessment be quashed given material errors

In an unexpected turn, the CMA requested that the CAT quash the CMA’s own decision in the assessment of the Spreadex-Sporting Index merger after accepting that it contains significant flaws.

After an in-depth Phase 2 probe that resulted in a 252-page final report, the CMA concluded in November last year that the completed acquisition by Spreadex of a competing online sports betting company should be unwound given its likely impact on competition. However, following appeal by Spreadex, the CMA has now accepted that it made errors in its final report which may have led to an improper assessment of the merger’s competitive effects. In particular, the CMA conceded that its summaries of third-party evidence did not accurately reflect the underlying material and that this may have prevented Spreadex from making material representations on the merger counterfactual. The CMA acknowledged that the process had not met its usual standards and requested that the CAT quash its decision. The CAT upheld this request on 4 March 2025, meaning that the merger will now be remitted to the CMA to make a new decision.

This unusual step by the CMA may somewhat be influenced by the pressure it has recently faced to support the government’s pro-growth agenda. Following the dramatic departure of the CMA’s chair who was replaced by a former Amazon boss earlier this year, the CMA published its proposals for improving the UK merger control regime to drive growth, investment and business confidence. With this in mind, it remains to be seen whether the CMA will reach the same conclusion on the likely competitive effects of this merger when it reconsiders its decision. One possibility is that the CMA will seek to impose a behavioural remedy to address any competition concerns, focused on shaping the future conduct of the merger entity, rather than the more traditional structural remedy of a divesture. This is an option that the CEO of the CMA, Sarah Cardell, indicated that the CMA may be more willing to consider in its quest to take a pro-growth approach in its role of promoting competitive markets (see the speech here).

The CMA rightly does not seek to defend a report which fails properly to implement its established processes.

Subscribe to receive our latest insights - on the topics that matter most to you - direct to your inbox, at your preferred frequency. Subscribe here

Tags

technology, it disputes, competition law, competition litigation, article