US antitrust and pay-for-delay agreements

The U.S. Supreme Court has recently delivered an important ruling concerning pay-for-delay agreements entered into between brand and generic drug companies. Since 2001 the FTC has filled a number of lawsuits to stop pay-for-delay deals, which consist in settlements between brand and generic drug companies whereby the former pay the latter not to bring lower-cost alternatives to the market. As a result competition arising from generic drug companies is stifled and consumers harmed. In its judgment FTC v Atavis Inc et alii, the U.S. Supreme Court held that pay-for-delay settlements between brand and generic drug companies are subject to antitrust scrutiny, thus reversing the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit which had ruled that such agreements were insulated from antitrust scrutiny. 

  

OFT uses power to suspend a credit licence for the first time

The power to suspend credit licences was introduced in a amendment to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 that came into effect on 13 February 2012. The OFT has made use of such power in a recent case involving Donegal Finance Limited, a company licensed to offer consumer credit, credit brokerage and debt collecting services. More on the guidelines setting out how and when the OFT may use such power can be found here.