Competition Appeal Tribunal Sets Deferential Standard for CMA Merger Control Review

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

A recent decision by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), Tobii AB (publ) v. Competition and Markets Authority, confirms a deferential standard for the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in its merger prohibitions.

The CMA is widely regarded as a thought leader among merger control authorities. Although the U.K.’s merger control regime is technically voluntary, the CMA’s mergers intelligence committee is quick to call in mergers that catch its eye, both before and after closing. The CMA has been aggressive to assert jurisdiction over foreign-to-foreign deals with little U.K. nexus and a fast adopter of theories from academia on "killer" acquisitions or innovation. Its analytical lens has extended well beyond classical antitrust analysis — i.e., reviewing deals that could result in unacceptable levels of concentration or exclusion of rivals — to deploy more speculative theories, such as whether ostensibly outsized valuations mask anticompetitive intent; whether currently nascent competitors might, in fact, be future heavyweights; or whether alternative buyers generate more competitive outcomes.

The system remains a purely administrative one, where case teams (assisted by expert panels) seek to assess deals’ potential competition issues against a breakneck administrative timetable. Judicial recourse is limited. The CAT is a highly specialized tribunal, but it hears appeals on mergers only under a judicial review standard: Barring illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety, the CMA’s decisions will stand. Some practitioners have observed that this standard accords merger decisions a near appeal-proof level of judicial deference.

In Tobii, the CAT heard a rare root-and-branch appeal on both the merits and procedure of a CMA merger prohibition. The CAT confirmed the high degree of deference accorded to the CMA, as to both factual assessments and procedural choices.

Key Takeaways

  • No de novo or merits appeal of CMA merger decisions is available. Appellants must meet the high bar of judicial review to overturn merger decisions, showing the decision is tainted by illegality, irrationality or procedural unfairness.1 CMA errors on core substantive issues, such as market definition or closeness of competition, will survive challenge unless so egregious as to meet the irrationality standard.
  • Hard-edged legal questions provide the most fruitful prospects for challenge as demonstrated in Eurotunnel,2 which involved consideration of the legal definition of an enterprise, as opposed to the acquisition of bare assets.
  • Claims alleging procedural unfairness can succeed in clear cases as demonstrated in Sainsburys/Asda.3 Here, the CAT struck down an impossibly short CMA deadline for responding to detailed working papers immediately before the main party hearings in the case. It held this was procedurally unfair in light of the exceptional complexity and volume of the materials and the CMA’s refusal of the parties’ request to extend the prenotification discussions to accommodate the extensive evidence gathering.
  • Nondisclosure of underlying evidence will only exceptionally result in procedural illegality. The CAT will allow the CMA to curtail disclosure on grounds of administrative efficiency. The parties are entitled only to understand the gist of the evidence against them. If evidential summaries allow a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the case, no greater disclosure will be required. Underlying data, surveys or documents need not be provided.
  • Successful quasi-merits style arguments based on distortion of the facts or lack of proportionality are exceptionally rare, given the very broad margin of discretion afford to the CMA and the very high threshold for showing irrationality or unreasonableness.

Tobii confirms that the CAT will be deferential to complex factual assessments when applying a judicial review standard. As the CMA embraces more speculative merger control theories, it may be asked whether a tighter standard of judicial accountability is required.

The Judgment

In Tobii, the CAT broadly upheld the CMA’s prohibition of Tobii’s acquisition of Smartbox, concluding the two communication-aids suppliers were close rivals, holding a combined 60-70% U.K. market share. The parties’ communication-aids were specialist dedicated devices, but they faced a wave of competition from consumer devices — tablets fitted with suitable software and accessories — which served the majority of communications-aids users. Some evidence suggested this was a genuine constraint on dedicated devices. The parties, indeed, had launched tablet like devices with similar price points to combat this new source of competition. Online surveys commissioned by the parties — but dismissed by the CMA — also seemed to support this constraint assertion. The parties’ essential challenge was that the CMA refused to acknowledge this dynamic, focusing essentially only on the purchases of National Health Service buyers, who perhaps understandably focused on dedicated devices, to the exclusion of the wider market.

Procedural Unfairness: Failure of Disclosure

The CMA did not provide disclosure of underlying evidence, including customer and competitor submissions (such as responses to CMA information requests) and call transcripts and submissions made by Smartbox. It maintained defendants were only entitled to understand the “gist” of the case to enable it to defend its interests, which could be adequately conveyed through anonymized summaries at the provisional findings stage.

The CAT held that the CMA owes a duty of procedural fairness but is not obliged to provide all evidence received or disclosure prior to releasing its provisional findings.4 At the provisional findings stage, according to the CAT, the CMA was not required to do more than provide summaries of the relevant customer/competitor questionnaires, anonymized customer responses and target submissions. Only the gist of the case the defendants have to answer, not the actual underlying materials, must be disclosed. To require more would negatively impact the efficiency of the procedure and deter third-party submissions. In fact, Tobii had made a detailed, on-point reply to the provisional findings, demonstrating there had been no unfairness.

Irrationality: Evidence Collection

Tobii asserted that the CMA made material errors in its evidence collection. The CMA maintained that it had taken all reasonable steps to understand the relevant information and that the totality of evidence relied upon was relevant, reliable and consistent.

The CAT held that the relevant legal test is the ordinary domestic standard of rationality (“irrationality”).5 The CMA has a wide margin of discretion when evaluating factual evidence, and therefore there “needs to be a strong case to show that the [CMA] has manifestly drawn the line in the wrong place.”6 The evidence does not need to be perfect, and a simple error by itself is not irrational if not material overall.

Consequently, the CAT found that it was not irrational for the CMA to solicit feedback from only institutional customers, as they represented approximately 90% of the parties’ customer sales. Similarly, the CMA did not have to consider Tobii’s dedicated end-user survey, as it had articulated clear reasons for rejecting it. The customer questionnaires were reasonable, since the CMA had taken steps when designing them to reduce the risk of bias or misleading responses. Finally, calculating diversion ratios based on a small subset of NHS customer data was reasonable, as the CMA also cross-checked the diversion data against a range of other qualitative and quantitative evidence, including the merging parties’ own sales data.

Irrationality: Market Definition

The CAT held that the CMA acted rationally in defining a market for dedicated communications aids to the exclusion of consumer devices. The CAT held that the rationality standard does not require it to reassess the relative weight given to different evidentiary factors or to trawl through the CMA’s analysis to identify arguable errors. The CAT’s only inquiry is whether the CMA had “a sufficient basis, in light of the totality of the evidence available to it,” for reaching its final decision.7

On this basis, it was reasonable for the CMA to disregard the SSNIP test since its theory of harm is not primarily concerned with price increases but rather with reduction in quality and/or choice of products and the level of innovation, the CAT ruled. Additionally, the CMA decision to not review substitutability on a product-to-product level was reasonable. While this approach did not “necessarily [reflect] the diversity and richness of competition between differentiated products,” the CMA verified the results using a range of other evidentiary sources, and there was no inconsistency.

The CAT was, however, prepared to fault the CMA for including one of the parties’ products within its posited market for dedicated devices. Tobii’s Indi product — one designed specifically to respond to the threat of consumer tablets — fell outside the relevant product market, having functionality and a price point similar to consumer products. The CMA’s conclusion was not supported by the available evidence. However, this error was not material since Indi’s inclusion did not have an impact on the market share or diversion analysis, as highlighted by the CMA in its final report. Consequently, it is not sufficient to identify an error of assessment. The merging party also must demonstrate that, but for this error, the CMA could have reached a different conclusion.

Irrationality: SLC Finding Based on Horizontal Foreclosure Not Supported by Evidence

Tobii asserted that the CMA made material errors in its substantial lessening of competition (SLC) assessment, since the evidence relied upon was not reliable or credible. The CMA maintained that it is a matter of discretion whether the body of evidence is sufficient to justify an SLC conclusion and so falls outside the scope of judicial review.

The CAT confirmed that the CMA must apply a “probabilistic test” to determine whether, after a full and proper consideration of the available evidence, it is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the transaction is likely to cause an SLC.8

On this basis, the CAT rejected Tobii’s argument that the total body of evidence from customers, competitors and the merging parties’ internal documents was, individually and/or collectively, insufficient to underpin an SLC finding. The CMA considered a range of evidentiary sources. Its conclusion was based “not on any single category of evidence in isolation, but on all the evidence taken together.”9 The judicial review standard only required the CAT to confirm that “there was some evidence on which to base [the CMA] decision,” but it’s for the CMA “to weigh up the totality of the evidence” available to it and conclude it was sufficient to ground its SLC findings.10 The CMA was not operating in an “evidential void.” It relied upon a range of data sources and verified its initial analysis by cross-checking against both qualitative and quantitative data sources. Tobii’s “granular arguments” regarding, inter alia, particular questions put to customers and competitors was not sufficient to establish that the CMA’s evaluation of the “totality of the evidence” was unreasonable or irrational.11 Furthermore, while the CMA’s inclusion of the Indi product in relevant market analysis added “unnecessary and avoidable uncertainty” to the CMA’s assessment, it was not a material error, as it did not have a meaningful impact on the overall analysis or final SLC conclusions.12

Irrationality: Vertical Foreclosure Analysis Not Supported by Evidence

The CAT partially upheld Tobii’s fifth ground of appeal. Tobii argued the CMA had no reasonable basis for its input foreclosure theory. The CMA held the merged entity could partially foreclose rivals by either increasing the wholesale price of Smartbox’s Grid software for downstream competitors and/or by degrading rivals’ access to the Grid software by refusing to support their hardware and thereby making them less competitive for end customers. However, the available evidence the CMA had reviewed related only to a situation in which the competition concern was based on a total foreclosure strategy, where the rivals could no longer offer the Grid software as part of their dedicated communication-aids solutions.

The CAT found the CMA acted irrationally. It was unreasonable for the CMA to not try to obtain evidence as to what impact a wholesale price increase would have on the merged entity’s downstream rivals. This was particularly egregious, according to the CAT, given that the evidence on file indicated that at least one downstream rival had absorbed a recent wholesale price increase, rather than pass it on to the end customers, which contradicted the CMA’s partial foreclosure theory of harm. Furthermore, the CMA had not obtained any evidence or conducted any economic analysis to identify whether such a partial foreclosure strategy would be profitable for the merged entity. Therefore, the totality of the evidence did not support a conclusion that the merged entity had the ability and/or incentive to engage in a partial foreclosure strategy. This was a clear case where the evidence available on the file did not support the CMA’s specific theory of harm.


1 Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for Civil Service, [1985] AC 374, at 410.

2 Société Coopérative de Production SeaFrance SA v. The Competition and Markets Authority, [2015] UKSC 75.

3 Sainsburys/Asda v. Competition Markets Authority, [2019] CAT 1.

4 See, e.g., Ryanair Holdings PLC v. Competition Commission [2014] CAT 3 (Ryanair), para. 116 “Fairness is an evolving concept . . . . It is a basic principle of administrative law recognized in many reported decisions. In O’Reilly v. Mackman [1983] 2 AC 237 at 279F-G, Lord Diplock rightly emphasized the fundamental nature of the right afforded by the rules of natural justice or fairness, namely to have afforded to the person concerned ‘a reasonable opportunity of learning what is alleged against him and of putting forward his own case in answer to it.’”

5 Tobii, para. 49, relying on BAA Limited v. Competition Commission [2012] CAT 3 (BAA), para. 20(5). The rationality test requires that the decision-maker had a sufficient basis in light of the totality of the evidence available to it for making the assessments. It refers to a situation where the decision is so unreasonable that no decision-maker, properly instructed and taking into account all relevant considerations, could make it. It requires an assessment of whether the conclusions are adequately supported by the evidence, whether the facts have been properly determined and whether all materials facts have been taken into account.

6Tobii, para. 183, citing in support Akzo Nobel N.V. v. Competition Commission [2013] CAT 13.

7 Tobii, para. 329, citing BAA and British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC v. The Competition Commission and The Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform [2008] CAT 25 (BSkyB) judgments in support.

8 Tobii, para. 341, citing BSkyB in support.

9 Tobii, para. 361.

10 Tobii, para. 365.

11 Tobii, para. 367.

12 Tobii, para. 380.

Download PDF

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our Privacy Policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at:

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.