A class action against car carriers who fixed prices can go ahead, a UK court ruled. The claim seeks compensation for UK motorists overcharged for vehicle deliveries between 2006 and 2012.
More specifically, London’s Competition Appeal Tribunal has given the green light to a class action to claim against the same five shipping companies.
Motorists who bought or leased a new car between October 2006 and September 2015 are automatically included in the claim, which is seeking damages worth around £150m ($203m).
Car carriers have been hit by fines across the globe in recent years. In fact, a new working group of international competition authorities has put companies involved in global supply chains on notice not to collude.
The working group is made up of competition authorities from the “Five Eyes” nations:
- The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- The United States Department of Justice
- The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
- The Canadian Competition Bureau
- The New Zealand Commerce Commission.
It will meet regularly to develop and share intelligence to detect and investigate suspected anti-competitive behaviour and collusion, using existing international cooperation tools.
The 5 competition authorities are making co-ordinated statements putting firms on notice that those attempting to use supply chain disruptions as a cover for illegal anticompetitive conduct, including collusion, will face the full force of the law.
Furthermore, three major Ro-Ro operators have been fined by the Malaysia Competition Commission (MyCC) for forming a price fixing cartel.
This cartel regards to increase in fares for vehicle transportation via Ro-Ro vessels between Langkawi and Kuala Perlis and vice versa. Besides the three operators, two other related enterprises were held responsible for the same conduct.
India has also fined several major Japanese car carrier companies, finding them guilty for violations of India’s Competition Act, which prohibits anti-competitive agreements including cartels.
The CCI entered its final order against NYK Line, K-Line, Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, and Nissan Motor Car Carrier Company for having created and operated a cartel affecting the maritime motor vehicle transport services operated on multiple trade routes for original equipment manufacturers.
