Press release

Cleanroom laundry businesses alleged to have broken competition law

皇冠体育app CMA has provisionally concluded that 2 suppliers of cleanroom laundry services have broken competition law through a market-sharing agreement.

Cleanroom

In its statement of objections issued to the parties today, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) provisionally finds that, from May 2012 to February 2016, the suppliers, which also provide certain associated products and services, had a market-sharing arrangement under which they divided up customers by geographical territory and/or customer type.

皇冠体育app suppliers involved, which operated a joint venture which saw them both provide services and products under the Micronclean brand, are:

  • Micronclean Limited, formerly known as Fenland Laundries Limited (Fenland); and
  • Berendsen Cleanroom Services Limited, formerly known as Micronclean (Newbury) Limited (Berendsen Newbury)

Cleanroom laundry services are supplied to customers with operations in sterile environments, including pharmaceutical manufacturers, NHS pharmacies and manufacturers of semi-conductors, micro-electronics, medical devices and precision engineering. Such customers wear specialist garments which need to be laundered in way that prevents particulates contaminating their working environment.

皇冠体育app parties had been trading under the 鈥楳icronclean鈥� name since the 1980s, by virtue of the longstanding joint venture. 皇冠体育app market-sharing arrangement alleged by the CMA arose from trademark licence agreements which operated from 30 May 2012 until they were terminated (when the related joint venture was disbanded) on 3 February 2016.

皇冠体育app CMA provisionally finds that under the market-sharing arrangement, Fenland served customers in an area north of a line broadly between London and Anglesey, whilst Berendsen Newbury served customers located south of that line. Certain other customers were allegedly divided up between the parties based on the nature of their business or the product or service they required. 皇冠体育app alleged arrangement prevented each company from supplying customers which were located outside the company鈥檚 designated area and/or certain types of customers.

皇冠体育app CMA provisionally concludes that the arrangement 鈥� which came to the CMA鈥檚 attention in the context of its merger control function 鈥� restricted competition between the 2 suppliers.

Ann Pope, CMA Senior Director of Antitrust Enforcement, said:

However they arise, market-sharing agreements are a serious breach of competition law, which usually deny customers the benefits that arise from competition - such as lower prices, greater choice and innovation and improved service. We allege that even though these 2 companies could have supplied all relevant types of customer, including customers outside each party鈥檚 designated area, they instead agreed not to compete.

It鈥檚 essential that companies regularly consider the competition law implications of all their commercial arrangements including when entering or buying into joint ventures. 皇冠体育appy should take full and prompt action when the risk of breaking competition law is identified.

皇冠体育appse are provisional findings only and no conclusion can be drawn at this stage that there has been a breach of competition law. We will carefully consider any representations from the parties before deciding whether the law has been broken.

Notes for editors

  1. 皇冠体育app CMA is the UK鈥檚 primary competition and consumer authority. It is an independent non-ministerial government department with responsibility for carrying out investigations into mergers, markets and the regulated industries and enforcing competition and consumer law.
  2. 皇冠体育app Competition Act 1998 prohibits agreements, practices and conduct that may have a damaging effect on competition in the UK. 皇冠体育app Chapter I prohibition covers anti-competitive agreements and concerted practices between businesses which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the UK. Any business found to have infringed the prohibitions in the Competition Act 1998 can be fined up to 10% of its annual worldwide group turnover.
  3. A statement of objections gives parties notice of a proposed infringement decision under the competition law prohibitions in the Competition Act 1998. It is a provisional decision only and does not necessarily lead to an infringement decision. Parties have the opportunity to make written and oral representations on the matters set out in the statement of objections. Any such representations will be considered by the CMA before any final decision is made. 皇冠体育app final decision is taken by a 3-member case decision group, which is separate from the case investigation team and was not involved in the decision to issue the statement of objections.
  4. 皇冠体育app statement of objections is addressed to the following companies, which the CMA provisionally considers were directly involved in the alleged infringement: Micronclean Limited (formerly known, before 1 July 2016, as Fenland Laundries Limited) and Berendsen Cleanroom Services Limited (formerly known, before 15 September 2015, as Micronclean (Newbury) Limited). 皇冠体育app statement of objections is also addressed to Berendsen plc, in its capacity as parent company of Berendsen Cleanroom Services Limited since 13 September 2014.
  5. 皇冠体育app statement of objections will not be published. However, any person who wishes to comment on the CMA鈥檚 provisional findings and who is in a position materially to assist the CMA鈥檚 assessment of the case may request a non-confidential version of the statement of objections by contacting Simon Deeble ([email protected]) by 3 February 2017.
  6. 皇冠体育app case came to the CMA鈥檚 attention in the context of two related merger reviews. 皇冠体育app CMA investigated and cleared a merger between the joint venture vehicle then jointly owned by the suppliers, ie Micronclean Limited (since re-named, as of 1 July 2016, Fenland Laundries Limited), and Guardline Technology Limited. 皇冠体育app CMA also investigated a proposed merger between Fenland and Fishers Cleanroom prior to the deal being abandoned.
  7. For more information on how to achieve compliance with competition law, see the CMA鈥檚 guidance for businesses. 皇冠体育app CMA has also produced a series of animated videos explaining the main principles of competition law and how they affect small businesses.
  8. 皇冠体育app CMA has also created a form so anyone concerned about potential anti-competitive or market issues can raise an alert.
  9. For more information on the CMA see our homepage or follow us on , Twitter , and . Sign up to our email alerts to receive updates on Competition Act 1998 and civil cartels cases.
  10. Media enquiries should be directed to Rory Taylor ([email protected], 020 3738 6798).

Updates to this page

Published 20 January 2017