EU Competition Newsletter - March 2017

What Future for EU Public Procurement Law in the UK After Brexit?

French Competition Authority’s Strike Against Pétanque Tossing Ball Leader

German FCO Publishes Guidance Note on Prohibition of Vertical Price Fixing

Italian Competition Authority Opens In-depth Cartel Investigation in the Communication Sector

No Hiding a Cartel Under a Joint Venture Marketing Company

All Bets Are Off!

UK Begins to Reshape Its World Trading Relationships Following Brexit With Parliamentary Inquiry Into Potential US/UK Trade Deal

What Future for EU Public Procurement Law in the UK After Brexit?

Those aficionados of the silver screen will remember comedians Laurel and Hardy and in particular their catchphrase 'Well here's another nice mess you've gotten me into'.

Well that seems to be an appropriate 'epitaph' for the challenges and issues that UK procurement legislation faces after Brexit.

Most of the complex laws and regulations around the tendering of major public contracts derive from EU law. Removing the supremacy of EU law and the binding nature of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rulings, as well as abandoning a number of enforcement and transparency mechanisms designed at a European level, is likely to play havoc with legal certainty after Brexit.

So in the aftermath of Brexit, will current UK public procurement legislation be swept away? Or if retained what will it look like?


Not much is going to change... at least initially!

The legislation and the current legal framework for enforcing the public procurement rules will not change before the UK leaves the EU as the UK still retains its full membership rights and obligations.

However the form of post-Brexit UK public procurement legislation could be a lot different.

Much, of course, will depend upon the terms of any future trade agreements between the UK government and the remaining 27-member-state trading bloc, as well as the extent to which the UK wishes, and is able, to maintain access to the EU's single market.

If we exit the single market, which seems likely given Theresa May's Lancaster House speech on 17 January 2017, the UK may have to rely upon World Trade Organization (WTO) membership and its participation in the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) to gain access to key EU and other markets.

The Great Repeal Bill (the main piece of legislation which will turn EU law into UK law on Brexit) is likely to specifically confirm, with appropriate amendments, the UK-implementing procurement regulations, leaving the government the ability to review the legislation at its leisure at some future time. However, this re-enactment of the legislation in a post-Brexit world is going to produce a number of key practical and legal issues relating to the new legal framework and how if at all they interact with EU law.

There is no doubt that after Brexit the UK government will have more freedom to make changes to the UK regulations than it currently enjoys. However the GPA does contain rigorous rules on how procurements must be carried out and so remaining a signatory would therefore tie the UK government's hands to a certain extent. Nevertheless with this greater latitude the government could look to amend the scope of the rules and simplify competitive tendering procedures, remedies and also rules on post-award contract modifications.


At the time of writing, the UK Parliament appears to be on course to approve the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill by early March 2017, and with it disappears the last obstacle to the start of the Brexit negotiations. It therefore looks likely that Theresa May will meet her self-imposed deadline of the end of March for the service of an Article 50 notice upon Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, which will 'sound the starting gun' on the Brexit process.

From the date of service of the Article 50 notice there is a period of two years (or any extension agreed between the UK and the remaining 27 member states) during which the UK has to agree a new relationship with the EU. Although the government has signed up to achieving an agreement within this two-year period, it is likely that any agreement is going to take much longer to negotiate. This could take us well beyond 2019.

So what is likely to be the impact upon UK public procurement in the aftermath of the UK's vote to leave the EU and what is likely to be the longer term impact following the actual implementation of Brexit itself?

The current impact of Brexit

Most of UK procurement legislation derives its legislative base from a series of EU Directives. These Directives are implemented into UK law through secondary legislation. So until such time as the UK leaves the EU it remains a full member of the currently 28-member trading bloc and it must obey the rights and obligations it has signed up to under the Treaty of the European Union and Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Notwithstanding the referendum vote, the UK government still continues to implement EU Directives and obey EU law and will still continue to do so until its departure.

As such there is likely to be no immediate impact on the legislative position in the UK and all the same provisions continue to apply, including the EU Treaty principles of equal treatment, non-discrimination, transparency, mutual recognition and proportionality, as they remain part of UK law. The UK will still respect the supremacy of EU law and our courts will still be bound by rulings of the European Court.

Some have suggested that judges in the UK courts might feel less constrained by European Court rulings with the imminent prospect of withdrawal. However not only would such an approach be wrong in law but it also fails to appreciate the genesis of the system of UK procurement law as a body of EU law, the strength of which is its harmonised application. So this attitude is not going to change any time soon.

Great Repeal Bill

The Great Repeal Bill will confirm the UK-implementing regulations as part of UK law. This is an essential requirement as the regulations were made under the European Communities Act 1972 which is being repealed. Therefore generally speaking there will be no immediate impact on the main provisions in procurement legislation.

However in specifically incorporating the UK-implementing regulations in UK law there needs to be a number of amendments which reflect that we are no longer a member of the EU. Therefore references to the EU institutions, other EU legislation and EU transparency obligations referencing the OJELI will need to be removed and, where appropriate, substituted with English equivalents.

In addition certain other immediate practical issues will arise:

EU case law

What is the status of EU case law both before and after Brexit? Will the UK courts be obliged to follow pre-Brexit case law and will they turn their back on future EU jurisprudence? One of the key benefits for the UK as well as other member states of a pan-European system of public procurement was a harmonious interpretation of the law which emanates from the EU Directives. Cases often give insights into how the rules have been interpreted and what duties contracting authorities are under; for example the amount of details they must give unsuccessful bidders or what constitutes an abnormally low tender. It is highly unlikely that UK courts will be obliged to follow CJEU rulings post-Brexit. However in my view it is likely that given the origin of the rules, courts will be bound as a matter of law by rulings pre-Brexit and will find future rulings highly persuasive. For the most part they will follow them.

EU Directives as an aid to interpretation

Where there is ambiguity as to the meaning of the UK regulations, the underlying EU Directive is consulted and to assist in its interpretation the Directive's recitals are particularly important. For instance the recitals to the 2014 Directives are currently used for interpretation and in practice they actually contain important additional obligations. For example, they specify that the award criteria for the competitive procedure with negotiation must remain consistent throughout the process. This requirement is not obvious from the wording of the Directive itself. The interpretation and/or definition of these concepts may no longer be clear without recourse to the source legislation. So how are the courts going to react? My hunch is that it will probably be business as usual.

Transparency obligations

Depending upon the terms of the exit treaty it may no longer be possible for UK authorities to publish contract notices, contract award notices and VEAT notices in the OJELI. This really seems to defeat the object of widest possible transparency. We may have to settle with more localised transparency in Contracts Finder. This may be an issue which the UK government pushes for in negotiations as it would be to its benefit to advertise in the OJELI and receive competitive bids from throughout the EU. However all this seems somewhat incongruous for a non-EU member state.

Do Treaty principles have a place post-Brexit?

The key EU Treaty principles are enshrined in UK legislation (ie see Reg 18 of Public Contracts Regulations 2015) and are currently interpreted in light of EU law. Will the UK courts develop separate jurisprudence or will they continue to track and follow the EU enforcement of these principles in a post-Brexit world?

Post-Brexit implications and likely changes

UK public procurement legislation will be heavily influenced by the nature of any future trade agreements between the UK and the EU. It looks like the UK will be exiting the single market and therefore the UK will have to rely on WTO membership and its participation in the GPA. There is likely to be the need for some renegotiation to create a bespoke UK-specific schedule to the GPA and to agree specific rules for the UK's WTO membership. Therefore the position is unclear.

However the GPA contains some rigorous rules on how procurements must be carried out, although many of them are familiar as they were a key influence behind the new EU public procurement package in 2014. So being a signatory of the GPA ties the UK government's hands to a certain extent.

There is no doubt that in this scenario the UK government would have more freedom to make some changes than it currently does even over and above gold-plating EU Directives.

Scope of the rules

The GPA does not cover private utilities or defence procurement. At the present time there are specific EU rules which cover some utilities and defence procurement. It seems very unlikely that the UK government would want to remove utilities from competitive tendering procedures. There may be more room for manoeuvre with defence procurement, which has always been a sensitive subject among EU member states. Less access for non-UK bidders for defence and security-related contracts could be a distinct possibility. Mind you, all that appears counter-intuitive when viewed against the current government's increasing drive to regulate single-source contracts and increase competition. The government is therefore unlikely to take steps which would remove welcome competition for these types of contracts.

Less stringent remedies

The GPA requires the implementation of a remedies regime but doesn't prescribe quite the detail of the EU regime. It therefore appears likely that given time the UK would materially alter the remedies regime. There are certain concepts, alien to English law, which are the hallmark of the EU remedies regime. It would not be a surprise therefore if, in time, we see the UK turning its back on automatic suspension for contested awards and possibly also ineffectiveness. The judicial review regime may in time take over from the specific EU-based remedies regime.


Membership of the GPA will allow the government to simplify many of the public procurement rules transposed from the 2014 Directives while at the same time retaining the benefit of lighter touch competitive procedures. Many UK bodies have internal rules that require them to observe competitive tendering processes even for much lower value contracts such as local authority standing orders, so the government is unlikely to turn its back in any meaningful way on competitive tendering procedures. Examples of how the regime could be simplified could include relaxation of the rules on contract modifications and on the requirement relating to transparency of evaluation. However we are likely to still see the government procedures to promote transparency of opportunities and contract documents to ensure effective competition as a way of driving best value. This is to be contrasted with many of the EU rules which focused on transparency during the procurement process, the principal reason for which was in order to promote non-discrimination and prevent national favouritism.

State aid rules

Are we going to see a surge of government support for UK industry once we leave the EU? This is unlikely. Although we will be free of the state aid rules in the TFEU, any free trade agreement with the EU is likely to impose similar obligations upon the UK to stop an unjustified distortion of trade and competition. However, dependent upon the terms of the deal, the rules might be more limited in scope than the current ones, especially if certain specified sectors are granted free-trade access to the EU but not others. Even if EU state aid rules or a variant in a free-trade agreement were not to apply to the UK post-Brexit, there will still be some restrictions on the ability of the state to subsidise UK companies as a result of WTO rules. But the remedies available to challenges subsidies would be weaker if the current WTO rules were applied to the UK. However a key consideration right now will be whether any contracts are affected by European Commission grants and/or state aid and to determine what effect Brexit will have on that funding.

This article first appeared in the Procurement & Outsourcing Journal

French Competition Authority’s Strike Against Pétanque Tossing Ball Leader

The French pétanque tossing ball leader, Obut, was sanctioned by the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) for abusing its dominant position (market share of over 80% in the manufacturing market) by imposing upon its distributors a resale pricing policy, thus virtually eliminating competition in the pétanque ball retail market. Obut did not deny the allegations and requested a settlement with the FCA, resulting in a 320,000 euro penalty on the tossing ball manufacturer and retailer.

Obut operates in both the pétanque ball manufacturing and distribution markets, which puts it in a competitive position with its distributors. Therefore, in order not to suffer from potentially lower prices that could be offered to customers by its distributors/competitors, Obut requested its distributors to comply with its catalogue prices. Thus, from May 2009 until July 2016, Obut was found to have abused its dominant position, by imposing a price standardization policy in the pétanque ball retail market, and consequently preventing its resellers from boosting their sales through cheaper prices or special offers.

Obut was found to have monitored compliance by its distributors by sending sales representatives to their outlets to check on the selling prices. An Obut employee was even dedicated to the monitoring of prices on the resellers’ websites. Failure to comply with Obut’s pricing policy would lead to commercial retaliation: late deliveries, orders blocked, dereferencing measures, etc.

Moreover, this abuse of dominant position was harmful for consumers who could not benefit from competition between pétanque ball sellers and remained dependent on this price standardization policy.

The FCA notified the company of the aforementioned grievances. Rather than disputing the alleged damages, Obut did not deny them and requested a settlement under article L. 464-2 paragraph III of the French Commercial Code, which allows the acceptance of a proposal from the authorities as to a penalty within a minimum and a maximum amount, it being specified that the FCA may take into account any mitigation measures undertaken by the company. Thus, after the grievances were notified, Obut made the commitment to implement a compliance program to include competition law training for its staff, appointment of a compliance officer and the submission to the FCA of an annual report presenting measures undertaken by the company to adhere to such compliance program. Taking those preventive measures into account on balance against the seriousness and the duration of the wrongdoings, the FCA imposed a 320,000 euro penalty on the French pétanque ball leader. The maximum penalty that could have been imposed on Obut was 1.6 million euros (10% of its annual revenue, pursuant to article L. 464-2 paragraph I of the French Commercial Code).

On a side note, it is interesting that this settlement is the fifth transaction of this nature since the implementation of the settlement procedure in August 2015 under the growth, business and equal economic opportunities Act of 6 August 2015 (“loi pour la croissance, l’activité et l’égalité des chances économiques”) [see for instance "French Competition Authority Sends Unprecedented Warning Against Gun Jumping", Bryan Cave EU & Competition Law Update, November 2016]. Recourse to such settlements may increase as the French legislator is increasingly trying to incite companies to cooperate with authorities in other areas through similar agreements (see for example the recent implementation of the judicial public interest agreement under Sapin II Act for corruption and bribery practices (“convention judiciaire d’intérêt public”), similar to the US Deferred Prosecution Agreement).

FCA Decision 17-D-02 dated 10/02/2017

German FCO Publishes Guidance Note on Prohibition of Vertical Price Fixing

Under German law, vertical price fixing constitutes a regulatory offence, which comes regularly with a severe fine. The FCO on 25 January 2017 publicised a draft guidance note on vertical price fixing in the brick-and-mortar food retail sector. By giving general explanations regarding the legal and economical background of vertical price fixing under German and European Community Law and also presenting relevant decisions of the FCO in former antitrust proceedings, the FCO intends to offer guidance especially to small and medium-sized companies. In addition the guidance note also means to replace the unofficial guideline published by the FCO in 2010. This was necessary, as the 2010 guideline was worded in a rather imprecise way, which caused profound legal uncertainties on the side of the addressed companies.

Against this background, the guidance note addresses several issues that have regularly proven to pose difficulties for the market participants. As such, the guidance note illustrates the issues of vertical price fixing with reference to prices of third party retailers, the illegitimacy of fixed or minimum sale prices as a result of pressure from or incentives offered by the other party and the identification of unlawful compensation requirements for disappointed earnings forecasts.

Furthermore, the guidance note deals with the topic of data exchange between retailers and suppliers. Whereas the transfer of data on sales prices and quantities between retailers and suppliers is generally to be regarded as legal, the exchange of data regarding future price calculations and intended promotion prices is held to be anticompetitive by the FCO.

As to the important issue of recommended resale prices, the guidance note uses several case studies in order to cover problematic examples and to provide a more specific legal framework of the term “recommended”.

Although it can be argued that the guidance note remains rather vague and lacks the necessary degree of clarity one would wish in order to make business decisions based on the guidance note, it is important to remember that the document now published by the FCO is still a draft version and that the respective consultation is still ongoing. Thus, there is room for hope that the final version of the guidance note will provide a higher degree of clarity at least with respect to some of the problematic issues addressed.

The guidance note reflects the interpretation of law by the FCO. It is important to note that this guideline does not have any binding legal effect, the definitive interpretation can only be given by the courts. However, the note is of importance as good guidance to companies on the FCO’s view of the law.

Italian Competition Authority Opens In-depth Cartel Investigation in the Communication Sector

On 9 February 2017, the Italian Competition Authority (the "ICA") opened an in-depth investigation into two leading Italian companies (namely, Telecom Italia S.p.A and Fastweb S.p.A., hereinafter the "Accused Companies"), both operating in the telecommunication sector.

The investigation started as the Accused Companies informed the ICA that they executed an agreement aimed at creating a joint venture (the “Agreement”) in the form of another company named Flash Fiber S.r.l. (“Flash”). Flash would be controlled equally by the Accused Companies in order to realize the optical fiber architecture (also called Fiber To The Home “FTTH”) in 29 Italian cities.

Although the Agreement was intended to promote a more efficient development of technological infrastructure, the ICA alleged that at the same time it may impede, restrict or jeopardize competition in the national market of services for wholesale on fixed network and that of services for retailer on broadband and ultra wideband telecommunications.

In particular, the ICA alleged that under the Agreement the Accused Companies could coordinate their commercial strategies on fixed, broadband and ultra wideband networks, thereby reducing competition between two of the major vertically integrated operators in the relevant sector.

In light of the above, the ICA alleged that the Agreement would amount to an anti-competitive agreement in contravention of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

No wrongdoing has yet to be proved and the investigation continues.

No Hiding a Cartel Under a Joint Venture Marketing Company

We are used to companies being fined for cartels acting undercover to agree on prices or other market parameters. What about companies openly agreeing together through a joint venture company?

On November 8, 2016, the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) overruled a decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris regarding horizontal agreements set up amongst French millers through two joint venture companies for the purpose of co-marketing their products, one of which sold flour to the retail industry, and the other to discount outlets.

The two joint companies had been incorporated by the majority of French flour producers respectively in 1965 and 1971, at a time when the market’s structure and the booming retail industry compelled producers to organize themselves in groups in order to adapt to the market, so the millers argued. This is allegedly what led them to make agreements on the selling conditions of their flour for over forty years, through these two companies.

Thus, from 1966 until 2012 for the retail market, and from 2002 until 2011 for the hard discount industry, French millers agreed on the selling price of their flour and on the allocation of customers and delivery volumes according to geographical areas that had been previously assigned to each producer.

According to the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”), these practices led to an actual centralized organization of the flour market in France and resulted in the elimination of any type of competition amongst the millers. This, the FCA found, caused serious harm to French consumers due to the size of the cartel and to their particularly long-lasting agreements. Therefore, the FCA imposed a heavy fine on the members of the flour cartel for breach of Article L. 420-1 of the French Commercial Code and Article 101 TFEU.

The Court of Appeal, however, heard the arguments of the flour producers and ruled that the commercial agreements within the two joint companies did not constitute anti-competitive practices. As a matter of fact, the Court of Appeals considered that millers had been constrained to gather together through joint companies due to economic conditions, because they were not able to make market-satisfactory offers to distributors if acting individually. Therefore, they had no choice but to make combined offers though joint companies.

Accordingly, these joint venture marketing structures were compliant with competition law, and they allowed the millers to cooperate in order to meet the requirements of distributors and discounters.

The case was brought before the French Supreme Court, which overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court ruled that the criterion to be used to assess whether joint venture marketing structures are compliant with competition law is whether or not the structure exceeds what is strictly necessary for the businesses to be able to enter and remain on the market. By inference, any agreement made outside of this scope may be considered an unlawful agreement.

This decision serves as a reminder that even open horizontal commercial agreements are not “safe harbor” protected from the scope of competition laws where the parties involved have sufficient market power.

Decision : 8 November 2016 no. 14-28.234.

All Bets Are Off!

On 8 February 2017, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) opened an in-depth investi-gation into two Italian companies (namely, Lottomatica Holding S.r.l. and Admiral Entertain-ment S.r.l., hereinafter the “Accused Companies”), both operators leaders in the betting sector.

The investigation started after the Accused Companies executed an agreement related to the acquisition of joint control of another Italian company (the “Agreement”), Big Admiral S.r.l. (“Big Admiral”). Big Admiral would be involved in the creation, development and management of a network of betting shops with new slot and video lotteries devices.

Although the Agreement at a first sight may have pro-competitive effects, the ICA held that in its view, it could violate Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

In particular, the ICA declared that its investigation would be aimed at verifying whether the commercial coordination, stemming from the Agreement, would be able to impede, restrict or jeopardize competition in the national market of betting devices.

The investigation continues and liability has not yet been determined. This is yet another example of an ICA investigation into collusive behaviour which have been increasing in recent years. Businesses should seek adequate legal advice before executing commercial agreements with present or potential competitors to avoid being implicated in such an investigation.

UK Begins to Reshape Its World Trading Relationships Following Brexit With Parliamentary Inquiry Into Potential US/UK Trade Deal

One of the advantages of Brexit is that the UK will be free to agree its own trade deals with the rest of the world for the first time in nearly 50 years.

However, until the UK formally leaves the European Union, the EU Commission in Brussels has exclusive competence to negotiate trade deals on behalf of the European Union. So whilst the UK can commence trade talks, it is not allowed under its international treaty obligations with the other EU Member States to formally enter into any trading pacts until it has seceded from the EU trading bloc.

On 2 February 2017, the House of Commons International Trade Committee announced that it was launching an inquiry into the potential for a UK-US trade agreement.

This inquiry constitutes one of the first steps for the UK in attempting to reshape its economic relationships with the rest of the world. However, there is an element of nervousness in both Brussels and London that any outline agreement with the Americans could impact the progress of negotiations with the EU.

The main aim of the inquiry is to analyse the challenges as well as opportunities such a trade agreement might present. It will consider the implications for the production and sale of goods and services between the two countries. The Committee hopes this will enable them to make helpful recommendations to the Government on how best to approach their future negotiations with the Trump Administration.

As part of its inquiry the International Trade Committee is inviting written submissions from interested organisations and individuals about their views on the scope and content of any future US/UK trade agreement. The Committee is particularly interested in the following areas:

  • what the UK’s priorities and objectives should be in negotiating any such agreement;

  • the possible impacts (both positive and negative) on specific sectors of the UK economy which could arise from such an agreement;
  • the extent to which any agreement could and should open-up markets in services, including public services;
  • the extent to which any agreement could and should open-up markets in public procurement. The EU/Canadian Agreement (CETA), agreed recently, opens up Canadian Federal and Provincial procurement opportunities to EU business for the first time. Should this be a goal for the US talks and how would that interface with Trump’s “America First” campaign;
  • how any agreement should approach regulation, including regulatory harmonisation;
  • what dispute-resolution mechanism should form part of any such agreement. In particular should there be an investor/state settlement procedure; and
  • what involvement, if any, the UK should seek to have in the North American Free Trade Area or any future regional free trade agreement involving the USA.

However there is not much time for interested organisations to make their views known on such a complex and detailed subject. The deadline for written submissions to the Committee is Monday 27 February 2017.

In these post Brexit referendum days it appears that the UK Parliament, as well as the UK Government, appear to be falling over themselves to make things happen quickly to establish their pro-Brexit credentials to their electorate.

Sounds like the US and the UK Administrations probably have a lot more in common than people imagined.

[View source.]

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.

© Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner 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.