Transparency data

Response: GCA statutory review 2025

Published 6 August 2025

Justin Madders MP
Minister for Employment Rights, Competition and Markets
Department for Business and Trade

By email only

5 August 2025

Dear Minister

I am writing in response to the consultation published on 13 May 2025 as part of the statutory review of the Groceries Code Adjudicator (GCA) for the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2025. I have answered relevant questions below, adopting the consultation’s numbering.

Questions for the GCA

2.1. For the statutory review period, how you have met your statutory duties set out in the GCA Act 2013? Comment in particular on:

a) how much you have exercised your powers

I attach at Annex A to this letter extracts from the annual reports that I have published for each year of the review period in accordance with section 14 of Groceries Code Adjudicator Act 2013 (the Act).

I did not launch any investigations and did not use any new formal enforcement measures during the review period. On 20 June 2025, after the end of the review period, I launched an investigation into the conduct of Amazon.com, Inc in respect of paragraph 5 of the Code: No Delay in Payments.

I did not during the review period use the powers provided by section 12 of the Act to issue formal guidance. Understanding of the Groceries Supply Code of Practice (the Code) is, over 15 years since it came into force, generally good, including among the 14 large retailers (Retailers) and their direct suppliers. I have therefore considered it unnecessary, in enforcing the Code, to risk adding to the burden of compliance borne by the Retailers by publishing formal guidance. 

During the review period, I on one occasion gave formal advice to a Retailer as provided for by section 11 of the Act. My advice concerned the Retailer’s assessment of the governance arrangements that it had in place to ensure that it was complying with the Code. I have not otherwise used the powers afforded by section 11 to give formal advice, nor have I published best practice statements.

Section 2 of the Act provides that I must either arbitrate or appoint an arbitrator if a supplier refers a dispute to my office for arbitration. During the review period I acted as arbitrator in four disputes between a Retailer and a supplier. I have, while ensuring confidentiality in accordance with section 18 of the Act, used the understanding I have gained through arbitrations to inform my wider regulatory activity.

b) how effective you have been in enforcing the Groceries Code

Throughout the review period, I continued to implement the GCA’s collaborative approach to regulation. I improved the GCA’s collection and analysis of information to ensure I focussed on those issues most important to suppliers. My regular engagement with each Retailer was intended to ensure that they investigated those issues and resolved them where necessary. I used the evidence available to me, including but not limited to the findings of my annual survey, to ensure that I took a proportionate approach, driving improvements at less compliant Retailers while avoiding creating unnecessary burdens for more compliant Retailers.

The collaborative approach proved effective during the review period. The average proportion of direct suppliers reporting in my annual survey that Retailers consistently or mostly complied with the Code increased from 92% in 2023 to 93% in 2025. The proportion of suppliers reporting that they had experienced any Code issue also fell, from 36% in 2023 to 30% in 2025. Reported incidence of the most common specific Code issues also fell between 2023 and 2025, from:

• 15% to 11% for delay in payments;
• 12% to 9% for forecasting-related issues;
• 10% to 9% for obligation to contribute to marketing costs; and from
• 8% to 7% for not meeting duties in relation to de-listing.

I continue to consider other measures of my effectiveness in enforcing the Code but believe that the reported experience of direct suppliers of the Retailers’ compliance is the best single indicator of the effectiveness of enforcement. The GCA’s annual survey is the most robust available evidence of suppliers’ experiences, receiving almost 2,500 responses from direct suppliers in 2025.

Considering effective enforcement of the Code, on 17 December 2024 I applied to intervene in High Court proceedings between W Clappison Limited and Aldi Stores Limited. My intervention was permitted on 16 June 2025, which will enable me to assist the Court in its interpretation of the Code.

2.2 We would also welcome any comments you may have on the order-making powers contained in the Act and whether you would find it helpful for the Secretary of State to:

a) amend or replace the Groceries Code Adjudicator (Permitted Maximum Financial Penalty) Order 2015

I would not find it helpful for the Secretary of State to amend or replace the Groceries Code Adjudicator (Permitted Maximum Financial Penalty) Order 2015. I believe the possibility of a financial penalty is an important element of the GCA’s regulatory approach, increasing the likelihood of the collaborative engagement with the GCA by Retailers that has efficiently improved compliance with the Code.

b) make an order setting out the information which you may consider when deciding whether to investigate (see section 15(11) of the Act)

I would not find it helpful for the Secretary of State to make an Order limiting the information that the GCA may consider when deciding whether to investigate. I believe that limitations on the GCA’s ability to consider evidence from a wide range of sources could materially affect the likelihood of the GCA having reasonable grounds to suspect that a Retailer has broken the Code, making the possibility of a statutory investigation perceptibly lower, and therefore potentially undermining the regulatory approach that has improved compliance with the Code.

2.3 How effective has the GCA been since 2022 in:

a) improving retailer and supplier awareness of the Code?

Through the review period I worked to improve Retailer and supplier awareness of the Code and of the GCA, including using my annual report, newsletters and digital channels, direct meetings with individual Retailers and suppliers, and my annual conference as well as participation in other relevant conferences and seminars. This work has ensured that understanding has remained high among direct suppliers:

• 75% reporting a good or fair understanding of the Code in 2025 (74% in 2023)
• 70% reporting a good or fair understanding of the GCA’s role in 2025 (68% in 2023)

b) improving supplier confidence in raising issues with retailers and with the GCA?

Building on the Code Compliance Officers’ commitment, which I introduced in 2021, to treating information from suppliers confidentially, in February 2023 all Retailers affirmed that they want to work collaboratively with suppliers to resolve issues and to strengthen relationships. Each of the Retailers committed to ensuring that suppliers do not face negative consequences as a result of raising issues with the Retailer. I have proportionately monitored Retailers’ operationalisation of this commitment. The proportion of direct suppliers raising issues with a Retailer that reported their relationship suffering as a result fell from 30% in 2023 to 28% in 2025.

I used my engagement with suppliers through the review period to explain that I handle information confidentially in accordance with section 18 of the Act. I have sought to make suppliers aware of my ability to anonymise or aggregate supplier issues or to raise issues with Retailers more generally without reference to suppliers to ensure that I protect suppliers’ confidentiality. Suppliers remain able to report issues to me anonymously through my online platform. From 2023 to 2025, both the proportion of direct suppliers reporting that they would raise a Code issue with the GCA (58% to 59%) and the proportion aware of GCA confidentiality (81% to 80%) were stable. Of those that would not raise an issue or were unsure, the proportion reporting their reason as the possibility of retaliation by the Retailer fell from 41% in 2023 to 38% in 2025.

Questions for all relevant parties

1.11 Do you think the current model of the GCA is effective?

The GCA has significantly improved compliance with the Code since its establishment, with the average overall perceived compliance score across the Retailers being 93% in 2025 compared to 73% in 2014. This improvement in compliance has been delivered by the GCA  in its current form: focussed solely on the Code; at low cost and with that cost borne by Retailers; regulating collaboratively to keep appropriately low the burden on Retailers; and operationally independent from but supported by its sponsor department.

It was not possible during the review period to realise the efficiencies (were the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to provide assistance to the GCA) the potential for which the government identified during the third statutory review of the GCA.

1.12 Do you understand the GCA’s remit in relation to the ASCA?

I do not believe that the effectiveness of the GCA has been affected by the establishment of the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator (ASCA). I and GCA staff routinely met the ASCA and relevant Defra officials during the review period. We have discussed matters including the regulatory regimes overseen by the GCA and ASCA, cooperation to ensure clear communication to affected businesses, and the appropriate sharing of information to facilitate collaboration. I intend to continue to work closely with the ASCA and Defra to improve stakeholders’ understanding of the remits of the GCA and ASCA in order that each can achieve the objectives set for it.

1.13 Do you think there are unfair contractual practices in parts of the supply chain which are not covered by the Code or the Fair Dealings Regulations, but which are having a negative impact on grocery suppliers?

I note that the inclusion of the fair dealing provision in the Code was as a safeguard against the transfer of excessive risk and unexpected costs from Retailers to their direct suppliers (those transfers from retailers to suppliers as a consequence of retailers’ buyer power having been identified in the Competition Commission’s market investigation into the supply of groceries in the UK). During the review period I therefore focussed my attention on ensuring fair dealing in the context of the Code and in the relationships between Retailers and their direct suppliers.

Having identified issues related to the role of intermediaries in some grocery supply chains, I engaged with Retailers in line with my collaborative approach. I did not identify evidence of any Retailers making use of intermediaries with the intention of circumventing the Code. I did not recommend any changes to the Code to the CMA, not considering any change appropriate to ensure the Code remained suitable for its intended purpose.

Yours sincerely

Mark White

Groceries Code Adjudicator

cc: DBT GCA Review Team

Annex A: Statutory reporting requirements

Groceries Code Adjudicator Annual Report and Accounts (2022/23)

Disputes referred to arbitration under the Groceries (Supply Chain Practices) Market Investigation Order 2009
There was one ongoing arbitration at the end of the prior year reporting period. This was ongoing at the end of the 2022/23 reporting period. The GCA accepted appointment as arbitrator in two further arbitrations, one of which was concluded within the 2022/23 reporting period, and one of which was ongoing at the end of the reporting period.
Investigations carried out by the GCA
No new investigations were launched during the reporting period.
Cases in which the GCA has used enforcement measures
No new enforcement measures were used during the reporting period.
Recommendations that the GCA has made to the Competition and Markets Authority (formerly Office of Fair Trading) for changes to the Code
No recommendations for changes to the Code were made to the CMA during the reporting period.

Groceries Code Adjudicator Annual Report and Accounts (2023/24)

Disputes referred to arbitration under the Groceries (Supply Chain Practices) Market Investigation Order 2009
There were two ongoing arbitrations at the end of the prior year reporting period. Both were concluded within the 2023/24 reporting period. The GCA did not accept appointment as arbitrator in any disputes in the reporting period and, accordingly, there were no ongoing arbitrations at the end of the reporting period.
Investigations carried out by the GCA
No new formal investigations were launched during the reporting period.
Cases in which the GCA has used enforcement measures
No new formal enforcement measures were used during the reporting period.
Recommendations that the GCA has made to the Competition and Markets Authority (formerly Office of Fair Trading) for changes to the Code
No recommendations for changes to the Code were made to the CMA during the reporting period.

Groceries Code Adjudicator Annual Report and Accounts (2024/25)

Disputes referred to arbitration under the Groceries (Supply Chain Practices) Market Investigation Order 2009
The GCA accepted appointment as arbitrator in one dispute during the reporting period. That arbitration concluded within the reporting period. There were no ongoing arbitrations at the end of the reporting period.
Investigations carried out by the GCA
The GCA launched no statutory investigations during the reporting period.
Cases in which the GCA has used enforcement measures
The GCA used no formal enforcement measures during the reporting period.
Recommendations that the GCA has made to the Competition and Markets Authority (formerly Office of Fair Trading) for changes to the Code
The GCA has not recommended any changes to the Code to the CMA during the reporting period.