This appeal concerns costs and arises out of an investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority (the CMA) into the pricing of an epilepsy drug. Following an investigation lasting over three years, the CMA found that Flynn and Pfizer had abused their dominant positions in the UK market under domestic and EU competition law by charging excessive prices. Flynn and Pfizer appealed the CMA’s decision to the Competition Appeal Tribunal which decided that although Flynn and Pfizer held dominant positions in the market, the CMA had made errors in deciding that they had abused their positions.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal separately considered costs arising out of the appeal. Flynn and Pfizer both claimed their costs on the basis that they substantially won their respective appeals. The Competition Appeal Tribunal decided that Flynn and Pfizer were entitled to recover some of their costs from the CMA. The CMA appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and decided that the starting point or default position is that no order for costs should be made against a regulator who has brought or defended proceedings in the Competition Appeal Tribunal acting purely in its regulatory capacity. That starting point can be departed from for good reason but the mere fact that the regulator has been unsuccessful is not enough. Flynn and Pfizer now appeal to the Supreme Court.

Owen Maughan and John Maughan were charged together and separately with a series of offences committed between 13 July 2015 and 25 July 2016. They pleaded guilty to these offences when they were formally charged on 14 September 2017. Both men had previous convictions and the pre-sentence report stated that they both presented a high likelihood of reoffending.
On 21 December 2017, both men were sentenced at Belfast Crown Court to imprisonment for fourteen years (seven years in custody and seven years on licence). Their sentences were somewhat reduced because they had pleaded guilty at an early stage. However, they were not afforded the maximum discount on their sentences because did not co-operate with the police on arrest and because, for certain of the offences, they were either caught "red handed" or the evidence against them was overwhelming.
Both appealed their sentences to the Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) on the basis that they were manifestly excessive (Owen Maughan) and wrong in principle (John Maughan). The Court dismissed both appeals. Owen Maughan now appeals to the Supreme Court.