The Office of Fair Trading is set to target more company directors for criminal prosecution in a bid to stamp out anti-competitive behaviour, a senior figure at the competition watchdog said last night.

Simon Pritchard, Senior Director for Mergers at the OFT, hinted that charges brought in December against three British businessmen accused of cartel offences in the marine hose industry would be followed by other prosecutions. He said: “Watch this space. We have criminal enforcement high on the agenda.”

Speaking at a Times Law Panel debate on issues in competition law, Mr Pritchard offered a spirited defence against criticism from the audience and other panel members that the OFT has been too soft on deterring activity such as price-fixing, market-sharing and bid-rigging.

The debate, held before an audience of competition experts at the London offices of law firm Norton Rose, was chaired by Sir Christopher Bellamy, QC, former president of the Competition Appeal Tribunal. Also on the panel were: Michael Grenfell, a partner at Norton Rose; Stephen Kon, a partner at SJ Berwin; Paul Lasok, QC, a leading barrister; and Tony Woodgate, a partner at Simmons & Simmons.

During one exchange, Mr Lasok said that only the threat of criminal penalties would truly deter businesspeople form engaging in anti-competitive behaviour. Sir Christopher agreed, adding: “It won’t work until it’s criminalised and you really enforce it.”

Mr Pritchard said that the OFT accepted that the threat of criminal prosecution was the most effective means of enforcing competition law and reiterated: “Watch this space.”

Under the Enterprise Act 2002, the OFT can bring criminal charges against individuals who engage in certain types of cartel activity, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison or an unlimited fine. To date it has exercised those criminal powers only once.

Last December, Bryan Allison, David Brammar and Peter Whittle were arrested at Heathrow Airport and charged with conspiring to distort markets, fix prices and rig bids in the supply of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of marine hoses used for transporting oil. The three men had been allowed to return to the UK after cutting a deal to avoid jail in the US.

Mr Pritchard rejected suggestions that the OFT had merely taken the lead from American authorities in the marine hoses case. He said: “We’re working hard and doing a lot. We haven’t got to the point of [successfully] bringing a prosecution but we have a lot of work on our books.”

However, Mr Pritchard added that civil remedies were also necessary to offer redress for consumers when competition laws were breached. He spoke in support of private group actions such as the claim brought by Which! against JJB Sports on behalf of thousands of consumers who had been overcharged for football shirts because of price fixing.

Other panellists expressed reservations about private enforcement, voicing fears that it could lead to an explosion of US-style class action lawsuits. Mr Pritchard said he trusted that judges in the UK would prevent a similar class action culture by striking out “unmeritorious“ claims.

Explore Law

• Corporate Law

• Public Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Student Law

• Law Reports

Times Recommends

• Hundreds sued for sharing games
• So you want to study law?
• How the courts are coping with the mortgage crisis