In October 2017, the CMA obtained a warrant to enter Concordia’s (now called Advanz Pharma) business premises and search for documents relating to suspected anticompetitive behaviour in the pharmaceutical sector. Concordia applied to have the warrant discharged because it had been cooperating with the CMA’s investigation, and so there was no basis for the CMA to suspect that it would tamper with evidence. On January 16, the High Court rejected Concordia’s application, holding that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that Concordia might remove or tamper with certain documents on its premises.In October 2017, the CMA obtained a warrant to enter Concordia’s (now called Advanz Pharma) business premises and search for documents relating to suspected anticompetitive behaviour in the pharmaceutical sector. Concordia applied to have the warrant discharged because it had been cooperating with the CMA’s investigation, and so there was no basis for the CMA to suspect that it would tamper with evidence. On January 16, the High Court rejected Concordia’s application, holding that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that Concordia might remove or tamper with certain documents on its premises.