CAT dismisses claim that rules in online property portal are anti-competitive

The Competition Appeal Tribunal has given judgment on competition issues in a case brought by Agents' Mutual Limited (a mutual owned by its estate agent members) against Gascoigne Halman Limited (t/a Gascoigne Halman).

The competition issues concern the rules for participation in Agents’ Mutual’s online property portal “OntheMarket” and were transferred to the CAT by the High Court.

Gascoigne Halman alleged that certain of the rules infringed the Chapter I prohibition.  These included a rule by which an estate agent may list properties on no more than one other portal (one other portal rule); a rule restricting membership to office-based estate or letting agents (bricks and mortar rule); and a rule requiring members to promote only OntheMarket (exclusivity rule).

Gascoigne Halman also alleged that the arrangements were part of a collective boycott of Zoopla and/or Rightmove, again in breach of the Chapter I prohibition.

The CAT rejected all of Gascoigne Halman’s claims.  It found that the one other portal rule was objectively necessary to the rules which bind members of Agents’ Mutual.  It dismissed the claim that the bricks and mortar rule and the exclusivity rule were restrictive by object and Gascoigne Halman did not advance its case by arguing effects.  The CAT found no evidence that the rules were part of a collective boycott of Zoopla/ Rightmove.

Case 1262/5/7/16 (T) Agents' Mutual Ltd v Gascoigne Halman Ltd (t/a Gascoigne Halman) [2017] CAT 15