On 12 March 2024, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) provisionally decided to refer the veterinary sector for a formal market investigation.  The CMA has identified a range of competition concerns, including the effects of recent consolidation in the sector.

The CMA’s concerns

The CMA began an initial review of the veterinary sector in September 2023 to seek views on a number sector-wide issues that had come to its attention in the context of merger investigations.  Having carried out an initial review, the CMA has reached a provisional decision to open a formal market investigation.  The CMA highlights, in particular, the decreasing numbers of independent veterinary practices and the “rapid, significant, and ongoing growth of a few large, corporate suppliers”.  According to the CMA, 60% of veterinary practices are now owned by these “large corporate groups”, compared with 10% in 2013, partly as a result of “roll-up” acquisitions.  The CMA has identified six large corporate groups (CVS, Independent Vetcare, Linnaeus, Medivet, Pets at Home, VetPartners) owning veterinary practices, including three that are owned by private equity firms.  

In the CMA’s view, consolidation in the sector may have contributed to weaker competition and adverse outcomes for consumers.  Its five main areas of concern are:

  • Consumers may not be given enough information to enable them to choose the best veterinary practice or the right treatment for their needs.  The CMA noted a lack of transparency on pricing information and whether particular veterinary practices are independent or owned by corporate groups.  There may be negative effects on competition if consumers are unable to make informed choices between different practices and treatment options.
  • Concentrated local markets, in part driven by sector consolidation, may be leading to weak competition in some areas.  The CMA has identified a number of local areas where a majority of veterinary practices are owned by a small number of large groups.  The CMA has identified 1,134 postcode areas (out of a total of 2,831) where consumers may be affected by a lack of local competition.
  • Large integrated groups may have incentives to act in ways which reduce choice and weaken competition.  The CMA is considering whether practices owned by corporate groups may be steering consumers towards higher cost treatments or to other services provided by the same group.
    • Concentrating on providing higher cost treatment options.  Corporate groups that have invested in sophisticated equipment may focus on providing higher cost treatments, even if consumers would prefer lower cost options.
    • Keeping referrals, diagnostics, out-of-hours and cremation services within the group.  A number of groups have also acquired businesses in related markets, such as specialist treatment referral centres, diagnostic laboratories, crematoria and out-of-hours suppliers.  The CMA noted that some groups operate a “hub and spoke” business model, in which several branch practices (spokes) refer customers to additional services at a larger practice (the hub).  This may have led to reduced choice and higher prices for consumers, as well as reducing market access for independent competitors.
  • Pet owners may be overpaying for medicines or prescriptions.  The CMA is concerned that veterinary practices are steering consumers to buy medicines from them directly, rather than using third-party retailers, where the prices are often lower.  Because consumers are not made aware of cheaper alternatives, corporate groups that purchase medicines at low wholesale prices may not face sufficient competitive pressure to pass on these cost savings. 
  • The regulatory framework is outdated and no longer fit for purpose.  The industry’s statutory regulator, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, primarily regulates individual veterinary practitioners.  In the CMA’s view, it may not be equipped to regulate “the commercial and consumer-facing aspects of veterinary businesses” in its current form.

Potential remedies

As part of its assessment of whether to make a market investigation reference, the CMA has identified a range of potential remedies that would be available should it proceed with the market investigation.

For example, the CMA could require veterinary practices to provide more information to consumers to help them make informed choices about the treatments and providers available.  This could include information on pricing, ownership of veterinary practices and the range of treatment options and providers of related services.  Practices could also be obliged to provide this information in a form that could be used in digital comparison tools.

To remedy concerns over pricing, the CMA could consider imposing maximum prices, for example for prescription fees.  Veterinary practices could also be required to send registered customers annual “wake-up” letters prompting them to reconsider their choice of practice.

The CMA will also consider whether to order targeted structural remedies, such as divestments of certain businesses or parts of businesses akin to the divestment remedies it has accepted in recent Phase 1 merger review cases.  In the last two years, the CMA has accepted divestment remedies in four completed mergers in the veterinary sector that it had called in for review.[1]  In three of these cases the acquirer was controlled by one or more private equity firms.  The CMA cleared the acquisition of Goddard Veterinary Group by VetPartners, subject to the divestment of eight sites in the local areas in which it had identified competition concerns, along with all associated core assets.  It also required the divestment of eight independent veterinary businesses acquired by Independent Vetcare Limited and 11 veterinary businesses acquired by the Medivet Group. 

Finally, the CMA could make recommendations to the government to make changes to the regulatory framework.

Wider enforcement approach

The CMA’s scrutiny of veterinary services reflects its ongoing focus on consumer-facing markets and being seen to address cost-of-living pressures, in response to its 2023 Strategic Steer from Government, in which the CMA was encouraged to “focus on achieving outcomes that help individual consumers and businesses to meet cost of living challenges” and to “prioritise action that addresses cost of living challenges – the CMA should prioritise proportionate interventions which will deliver better value for businesses and individual consumers.”  The Government has encouraged the CMA to use its full range of tools to achieve these benefits for consumers, including market studies and investigations.  Since the beginning of 2023, in addition to the veterinary market, the CMA has begun reviews of the markets for housebuilding and infant formula, as well as studies in the digital and technology sectors.

Next steps

The CMA is currently seeking views from stakeholders on its proposed market investigation.  The deadline for this consultation is 11 April 2024.  If the CMA opens a market investigation, it will have 18 months to investigate the market in more detail and decide what, if any, remedies are required.


[1] ME/6967/21 Completed acquisition by CVS Group plc of Quality Pet Care Ltd (trading as The Vet), Decision on acceptance of undertakings in lieu of reference, 6 July 2022; ME/6967/21 Completed Acquisition by VetPartners Limited of Goddard Holdco Limited, Decision on acceptance of undertakings in lieu of reference, 12 September 2022; ME/7026-7033/22 Completed acquisitions by Independent Vetcare Limited (IVC) of multiple independent veterinary businesses, Decisions on acceptance of undertakings in lieu of reference, 17 August 2023; ME/7022/22, ME/7048-7051/23, ME/7053/23, ME/7055-7060/23 Completed acquisitions by Medivet Group Limited of multiple independent veterinary businesses, Decision on acceptance of undertakings in lieu of reference, 19 September 2023.

In the latest instalment of the Cleary Gottlieb Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Saverio Valentino, Board member of the Italian Antitrust Authority. The conversation covers Saverio’s first year in the role, the agency’s current priorities, merger control and FDI regulation, cartel enforcement, rights of defence, judicial review, and much more.

Continue Reading Antitrust Review Episode 23: In Conversation With Saverio Valentino

On February 13, 2024, the European Commission approved the acquisition of Asiana Airlines by Korean Air Lines (“Korean Air”),[1] following an in-depth Phase II probe and extensive remedy discussions. 

Continue Reading Clear for Takeoff: Commission Approves Korean Air/Asian Merger with a Slot Remedy Twist

In the latest instalment of the Cleary Gottlieb Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the Competition & Markets Authority.  Their conversation covers a range of topics, including her first year in the role, merger control, Microsoft/Activision, cartel enforcement, judicial review, international coordination, sustainability, and her plans for the future.

Continue Reading Antitrust Review Episode 22: In Conversation With Sarah Cardell

More than one and half year after the amendments to China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (the “AML”) came into effect, the State Council of China approved on December 29, 2023 and published on January 26, 2024 revisions[1] to China’s merger control notification thresholds (the “State Council Order”).[2]

Continue Reading China Introduces Revisions to Merger Notification Thresholds

In the latest episode of Antitrust Review, host Nick Levy is joined by Gina Cass-Gottlieb, Chair of the ACCC, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

Continue Reading Antitrust Review Episode 20: In Conversation With Gina Cass-Gottlieb

In the latest instalment of the Cleary Gottlieb Antitrust Review podcast, host Nick Levy is joined by Bruce Hoffman, Director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition between August 2017 and December 2019, and Dave Gelfand, who served from 2013 through 2016 as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.  Their conversation focuses on U.S. merger control, including Microsoft/Activision, the Baker Hughes framework, recent enforcement practice of the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission, and changes to the Merger Guidelines and HSR form.

Listen below, or select from the following links:

On November 15, 2023, the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) concluded that Microsoft’s investments in and cooperation with OpenAI, Inc. (“OpenAI”) do not constitute a notifiable merger under German law. [1]

Continue Reading FCO Declares OpenAI/Microsoft Cooperation (Currently) Not Subject To Merger Control

On November 9, 2023, the European Court of Justice dismissed, on most grounds, [1] Altice’s appeal against the General Court’s judgment[2] upholding the European Commission’s decision, in 2018,[3] to fine Altice €124.5 million for gun-jumping violations in connection with its acquisition of PT Portugal.  The Court of Justice confirmed that Altice breached the EU Merger Regulation’s notification and standstill obligations by acquiring and exercising decisive influence over PT Portugal prior to obtaining Commission approval.  The Commission had fined Altice €62.25 million for each of the two infringements.  The Court of Justice reduced one of the fines by about €10 million on account of the Commission’s failure to properly state reasons, but the judgment supports the trend toward strict enforcement of EU rules against early implementation of M&A transactions.[4]

Continue Reading European Court of Justice Confirms Altice’s Gun-Jumping Violation

In the latest instalment of Cleary’s Antitrust Review, host Nick Levy is joined by Dr. Jorge Padilla, one of Europe’s leading antitrust economists.  Their conversation covers Jorge’s 30-year career, the evolution in the application of economics and the use of economists in European merger control, the scope for advancing economic evidence in antitrust cases, the role that economics can play in enabling agencies to take account of sustainability objectives, and the impending regulation of digital platforms.

Listen below, or select from the following links: