I am linking to this document here because it addresses the appropriate jurisdictional scope of UK competition law, and how one of the unintended (unconsidered?) effects of Brexit is to increase the exposure of UK markets to foreign conduct with cross-border effects. This is a consequence of the different jurisdictional tests that the UK and the EU apply as regards competition law.
As noted in the submission, the UK prohibition against anticompetitive collusive practices: “applies only if the agreement, decision or practice is, or is intended to be, implemented in the United Kingdom (…)There is no corresponding provision in the TFEU as regards Article 101. Moreover, [EU law adopts] a “qualified effects test” as a basis of jurisdiction to apply EU antitrust law: i.e. when it is foreseeable that the multilateral or unilateral conduct in question will have an immediate and substantial effect in the EU. As the Court explained, this has the objective of preventing conduct which, while not adopted in the EU, has anticompetitive effects liable to have an impact on the EU market. Analogous considerations obviously apply as regards the UK market. Accordingly, if UK antitrust law is to provide protection which is of equivalent effectiveness, consideration should be given to the deletion or amendment of [the provision restricting the jurisdiction of UK competition law over collusive practices to those practices implemented in the UK.]’
There are many other topics of interest that are discussed in this contribution (e.g. the need to ensure a framework for recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments by UK courts in the EU after Brexit, in order to preserve the attractiveness of the UK as a venue for cross-border antitrust claims), and the submission is quite short and to the point, so I recommend that you read it.