By continuing to browse our site, you are consenting to the use of cookies.
Click here for more information on the cookies we use. Hide

Quick Links


Publication Date
18 September 2014
Case Reference
Track 2
Adjudicated Party
Due, Morten
Service Type
Tribunal's final assessment
Breaches raised

The Tribunal was asked to consider imposing a prohibition against Mr Morten Due pursuant to paragraph 4.8.2(g) of the 12th edition of the PhonepayPlus Code of Practice (the “Code”).

The case related to an adjudication against the Level 2 provider (the “Level 2 provider”) Upright Line S.A. (22 August 2013, case reference: 28205), which concerned a breach of the sanctions imposed by an earlier Tribunal (18 April 2013, case reference 11099) and non-payment of the associated administrative charges. The case on 18 April 2013 concerned a competition subscription service (the “Service”).

On 22 August 2013, the Tribunal instructed the Executive to initiate the process which may lead to the prohibition of Mr Morten Due, (an associated individual) pursuant to paragraph 4.8.2(g) of the Code.

The Tribunal concluded that Mr Morten Due was an associated individual and knowingly involved in a serious and/or series of breaches of the Code upheld in the adjudication against the Level 2 provider on 18 April 2013. However, it found that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Mr Morten Due was knowingly involved in breaches of the Code upheld by the Tribunal on 22 August 2013. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, the Tribunal concluded that the evidence presented by the Executive did not support the imposition of a prohibition. Accordingly, the Tribunal did not impose a prohibition on Mr Morten Due.

Click here to view the Adjudication decision