If someone else has already posted this, forgive me. Multi-tasking and haven’t caught up.
Lot’s of assumptions as we’re all kind of learning regulatory processes on the fly and one of the myths that many had accepted (including myself until recently) was that the CMA was a body that could be politically influenced, make a decision against precedence, and that unlike the FTC, there were no checks and balances against them. That’s not correct. If the decision is appealed and goes to CAT:
If the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) determines that the decision made by the competition and Markets Authority (CMA) was incorrect, it may refer the case back to the CMA for reconsideration.
When the CAT refers a case back to the CMA, it can do so with directions on how the CMA should proceed. For example, the CAT may direct the CMA to reconsider certain aspects of its decision, or to conduct further investigations into particular issues. The CMA would then have to reconsider the case and make a new decision based on the CAT’s directions.
However, in some cases, the CAT may be able to make a final determination on the case if it has all the information it needs and if the parties agree that this is the best way to proceed.
In any case, the CAT’s decision is binding on the CMA, and the CMA must comply with the CAT’s directions. The CAT’s decision may also be subject to appeal to a higher court.
What we heard previously was even in cases CAT didn’t agree, it would go back to the CMA and we’d likely get the same ruling. That is not the case at all.