Competition Commission v Gray Line Tours of Hong Kong Ltd & Ors

[2025] HKCT 2, enforcement proceedings were brought against the 4

 Respondent (“R4”) for breach of the First Conduct Rule (“FCR”) due to its involvement in an agreement to fix the prices of tickets sold by the 1

 Respondents. R4 admitted liability but disputed the methodology for the quantification of the pecuniary penalty.

R4 relied on the four-step approach (referred to as the “structured methodology”) laid down in 

Competition Commission v W Hing Construction Co Ltd

 [2020] 2 HKLRD 1229 (affirmed on appeal in [2022] 3 HKLRD 84), step one of which involves determining the base amount based on the value of sales directly or indirectly related to the relevant contravention.

The Commission argued that on the specific facts of R4’s case, an alternative “lump sum” approach – involving an assessment based on matters relevant to the gravity of the contravention – should be adopted.

In deciding that the structured methodology was appropriate in this case, Tribunal made the following observations:

 were instructed by Pinsent Masons for the Competition Commission.

Members

Recruitment

Mentions

More on Recent Judgments

New Competition Tribunal Guidance on ‘Structured’ vs ‘Lump Sum’ Approach to Determining Pecuniary Penalties in Enforcement Actions

About

Members

Recruitment

What's New