The number of businesses and individuals blowing the whistle on cartels in return for immunity from prosecution for their own involvement has jumped 69 per cent in the last year. Figures show that there were 22 “leniency” applications to the Office of Fair Trading or the Competition Commission in 2013, up from just 13 in 2012 and 14 in 2011. 

One of the worst infringements

James Geary, Principal at UK law firm EMW says: 'Competition authorities regard cartels as one of the worst infringements of competition law, cheating customers out of a fair deal and preventing other businesses from competing on a level playing field, so tackling it is a top priority.' He added: 'The problem is that cartels are very difficult to spot and even harder to prove. Encouraging those involved to come forward of their own volition and admit their activities in return for immunity if they can provide sufficient evidence against others is a tactic that seems to be working well.' UK competition authorities operate a leniency policy designed to encourage those who have engaged in any anti-competitive collusion - such as price-fixing, bid-rigging, output restrictions or market sharing - to report it. The first cartel member to come forward and provide evidence concerning the cartel can receive total immunity from fines, prosecution and director disqualification proceedings. Businesses can be fined up to 10 per cent  of worldwide turnover. Individual directors can be jailed for up to five years and could face an unlimited fine, as well as being banned from acting as directors for 15 years. 

Changes to cartel offence could act as further spur to self-reporting

Mr Geary points out that in April this year, changes were made to the cartel offence under the Enterprise Act 2002 which were intended to make it easier for the new Competition and Markets Authority (which took over enforcement of competition law from the Office of Fair Trading and the Competition Commission) to prosecute individuals for cartel involvement. In particular, the new rules remove the need to prove that those involved were acting dishonestly but they also introduce some new defenses and exemptions. He added: 'Despite some heavy fines meted out in recent years, there’s been a sense that the new Competition and Markets Authority will want to show it has arrived by levying even more punitive fines for anti-competitive behaviour.'