DLA Piper Achieves Landmark Victory in Competition Appeal Tribunal Case

In a significant legal triumph, DLA Piper successfully represented the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), culminating in a ruling that affirms the legitimacy of lending terms that were previously contested as unlawful subsidies. This decision, delivered on July 24, 2025, arose from allegations brought forth by Manchester property developer Aubrey Weis in the case of Mr. Aubrey Weis v GMCA [2025] CAT 41. Weis contended that loans amounting to £120 million, issued by the GMCA, constituted illegal subsidies due to their purportedly favorable terms.

The CAT, however, determined that the lending agreements were executed under standard commercial conditions, thus not fitting the definition of a subsidy as per the Subsidy Control Act 2022. The ruling is particularly noteworthy as it marks only the second case of its kind processed by the CAT since the enactment of this legislation, addressing pivotal questions regarding the classification of subsidies and the application of the commercial market operator principle outlined in section 3(2).

DLA Piper's team, led by Competition partner Sam Szlezinger, included Legal Director Chloe Cumber and Associate Tiffany McConaghy. In a statement, Szlezinger expressed satisfaction with the CAT’s judgment, noting that it serves as a reassuring precedent for local authorities engaged in lending initiatives. He highlighted that the tribunal recognized the GMCA’s adherence to rigorous and appropriate procedures when extending loans, reinforcing that the terms of the agreement were commercially viable without any indication of subsidy.

Weis's allegations included claims of a 'cosy relationship' between the GMCA and his development firm, suggesting that the loans were granted under flawed procedures that would not be sanctioned in the commercial sector. Additionally, he accused the GMCA staff of breaching their duty of candour, claims which the CAT decisively rejected. The tribunal's judgment underscores the careful scrutiny applied to the GMCA's lending processes, declaring them rational and compliant with market norms.

This ruling not only clarifies the parameters of subsidy control under the new legislation but also sets a legal framework for future lending practices by public authorities, potentially influencing similar cases across the United Kingdom. The decision is expected to provide a clearer path for local authorities navigating the complexities of subsidy regulations while fostering economic development through responsible lending practices.

As the implications of this ruling unfold, it will be essential for stakeholders within the public sector and the property development industry to closely monitor how this judgment will guide future regulatory compliance and lending strategies. The outcome reaffirms the importance of maintaining transparent and accountable processes in public lending, particularly in an era of heightened scrutiny regarding state aid and market fairness.