CMA Publishes Procedural Complaints Adjudicator Decisions

We use some essential cookies to make this website work. We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services. We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services. You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Role, scope, process and how to apply for a review of a procedural decision. Direct consumer enforcement: Procedural Complaints Adjudicator decision 2026/2 published. Direct consumer enforcement: Procedural Complaints Adjudicator decision 2026/1 published. Amended to reflect alignment of process across mergers and markets investigation phases and include digital markets, direct consumer enforcement and OIM functions. Procedural Officer decision on behalf of Flynn Pharma published If you are a party involved in one of the CMA ’s Competition Act, market or merger cases, the CMA ’s Procedural Officer provides a way in which you can raise procedural issues that you have not been able to resolve with the CMA Group or staff member responsible for the investigation. Similarly, if you are involved in one of the CMA ’s digital market competition regime cases or direct consumer enforcement cases, please see below for information on the role, scope and process for raising a procedural complaint with an adjudicator independent of the relevant CMA investigation (the ‘Procedural Complaints Adjudicator’). The procedural issues that you can raise with the Procedural Officer or Procedural Complaints Adjudicator (as appropriate) vary depending on the type of case. The Procedural Officer and Procedural Complaints Adjudicator are independent from the relevant CMA investigations, case teams and decision makers. Their role is intended to ensure that procedural issues can be addressed quickly, efficiently and cost effectively The Procedural Officer also chairs oral hearings with parties in Competition Act investigations. In direct consumer enforcement cases the oral hearing will be chaired by a CMA member of staff who, other than acting as chairperson or considering a procedural complaint, has not been involved as decision maker or in the day-to-day running of the investigation. The Procedural Officer determines significant procedural complaints that arise in Competition Act investigations. Significant procedural complaints considered by the Procedural Officer are those relating to: deadlines for parties to respond to information requests, submit non-confidential versions of documents or submit written representations on the Statement of Objections, Supplementary Statement of Objections or any Draft Penalty Statement requests for confidentiality redactions of information in documents on the CMA ’s case file, in the Statement of Objections, in a Draft Penalty Statement or in the final decision requests for disclosure or non-disclosure of certain documents on the CMA ’s case file issues relating to oral hearings, including, for example, with regard to issues such as the date of the hearing The Procedural Officer is not able to review CMA decisions beyond those listed above, for example decisions on the scope of requests for information or decisions relating to the substance of a case. The Procedural Officer becomes involved only at the request of a party to an investigation and only after the party has been unable to resolve the issue with the Senior Responsible Officer ( SRO ) of the investigation. A party wishing to refer an issue to the Procedural Officer needs to make an application as soon as possible after being notified of the SRO ’s decision on the issue in question and, in any event, within five working days of that notification. The application should be no longer than five sides of A4 paper and should include: the name and contact details of the applicant the name and contact details of lawyers acting for