Tuesday 8 – Wednesday 9 November 2022
This hearing consists of 4 appeals:
Appeal 1: By Appellant’s Notice filed on 11 May 2022 and sealed on 12 May 2022, the Fourth Respondent below, Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd (“K-Line”) appeal the judgment of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) dated 18 February 2022.
Appeal 2: By Appellants Notice filed on 9 May 2022 and sealed 17 May 2022 the Fifth Defendant/Respondent below, Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha (NYKK) (part of the collectively described MNW Appellants) appeal paragraph 189 (1) (2) (3) of the judgment of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) dated 18 February 2022
Appeal 3: By Appellants Notice filed on 9 May 2022 and sealed on 17 May 2022 the First-Third Defendants (collectively MNW Appellants) appeal paragraph 189 (1) (2) (3) of the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT) judgment dated 18 February 2022.
Appeal 4: By Appellants Notice filed 9 May 2022 and sealed 16 May 2022, the Sixth – Eleventh Defendants/Respondents (collectively MNW Appellants) appeal paragraphs 189 (1) (2) (3) of the judgment of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) dated 18 February 2022.
Facts: The CPO concerns follow-on damages claims arising out of the European Commission decision adopted on 21 February 2018 in Case AT.40009 – Maritime Car Carriers. The Commission Decision concluded that the 12 Defendants/Respondents had infringed Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement by participating in a single and continuous infringement consisting of the co-ordination of prices and the allocation of customers with regard to the provision of “deep sea”2 carriage of new motor vehicles (cars, trucks and high and heavy vehicles) on various routes to and from the European Economic Area (“EEA”). The Commission Decision followed settlement discussions with the Defendants/Respondents.
The proposed class members (“PCMs”), are persons (consumers or business purchasers) who purchased or financed certain vehicles in the United Kingdom during the period 18 October 2006 to 6 September 2015.
It is alleged that as a result of the infringement vehicle manufacturers paid artificially inflated prices for deep sea carriage services to transport new cars on various routes to/and from the EEA and that this alleged overcharge was ultimately borne by the first person to purchase or finance the vehicle (in particular through the delivery charge levied by retailers) The total claim value is estimated to be between £57- £115 million before interest.