Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Alcoholic drink manufacturers risk breaching competition laws in repositioning brands

TORONTO, ON - APRIL 7: Vince Pollard poses with a flavoured gin and tonic at Bar Raval        (Andrew Francis Wallace/Toronto Star via Getty Images)
TORONTO, ON - APRIL 7: Vince Pollard poses with a flavoured gin and tonic at Bar Raval (Andrew Francis Wallace/Toronto Star via Getty Images)

Alcoholic drink manufacturers are being warned they risk breaching competition rules as they scramble to re-position their brands in the wake of Scotland’s new minimum unit pricing policy.

Michael Dean, a partner in the competition and anti-trust team at Dentons, said Holyrood’s intervention in the market and the jump in the price of drinks previously placed at the cheaper end, had the potential to cause problems among many suppliers and retailers.

He said: “With brands at the value end of the market now more expensive, owners of more premium brands will want a higher price still, to maintain the differential, and they will want to communicate that to retailers.

“However, conversations on price can easily stray into territory that is seriously illegal, especially where positions have been destabilised.”

Mr Dean said there were two potential competition law breaches that retailers and brand owners could be in danger of committing as they try to orientate the alcoholic drinks market after the introduction of minimum unit pricing.

The first is discussions which lead to suppliers infringing retailers’ freedom to set their own prices and the second is the temptation to check where competing brands are resetting to – for example checking with competitors that their respective pricing is not out of line.

Mr Dean added: “The law says retailers have to be free to price – except in so far as the government’s intervention has an impact based on unit price, as it just has done.

“Brand owners shouldn’t be dictating the retail price, even though premium brands will undoubtedly want to retain their differential over lower-cost options.

“They need to be very careful about how they communicate that.

“A more general danger arises from the possibility that the new law normalises talking about prices within the industry or exchanging information, but of course that remains strictly illegal between competitors, whether that be among brand owners or among retailers.”