And compensation can now be claimed.

As you may know, the European Commission has found that the leading truck manufacturers acted as a cartel to co-ordinate their pricing and delay Euro 3 to 6 emissions technologies. Together they were fined €3,807,022,000; the largest antitrust penalty the European Commission has ever imposed.

It’s highly likely you were overcharged for your trucks and you may have incurred extra running costs. If so, you are now entitled to compensation.

Read more >

Collyer Bristow is working with Grant Thornton, London Economics, Vannin Capital and two leading barristers as a consortium to bring compensation claims for larger fleet owners.

 

We are in discussions with numerous companies operating truck fleets as an adjunct to their primary business activity. We have a particularly focus on those operating within the retail supply chain, from manufacturers through to end retailers. Companies which do not operate their own fleets, but instead outsource their transportation requirements, could also be entitled to damages.

Our bespoke service offers you expert representation, designed to achieve the maximum possible reimbursement at no expense to your company. The costs of your claim will be paid by litigation funder, Vannin Capital, in return for a share of your damages.

Insurance cover will be obtained for the group to provide a high level of protection against the risk of being ordered to pay the other side’s costs, in the unlikely event that the claim firstly goes to trial and secondly is unsuccessful.

Your next step? Call Stephen Critchley on +44 (0)20 7470 4523 or email here.

Contact us to discuss your claim.

Call Stephen Critchley, on
+44 (0)20 7470 4523 or email here

Stephen Critchley is Head of Competition Law at Collyer Bristow and will lead our core team of dedicated litigation lawyers. He specialises in complex, high-value commercial disputes and acted for the claimant in the UK’s first, and still leading, damages claim for breach of competition law.

Find out more about Stephen >Find out more about Stephen >

Stephen acted for the claimant in Inntrepreneur Pub Co (CPC) v Crehan, the first and still the leading claim for damages for breach of competition law in the UK.

Other experience includes:

  • Defending one of the “big four” UK mobile networks against a claim for alleged abuse of dominance in refusing to configure its switches to recognise the number-range of a competitor.
  • Representing a household-name telecommunications company accused of an anticompetitive agreement to prevent the landing of subsea cables into the UK, allegedly to close the UK market off from competition.
  • Advising a drugs company in relation to investigation by the Competition & Markets Authority of suspected excessive pricing following a six-fold price increase after its drug was released from NHS price control.
  • Advising a major overseas newsagent on the legality of WHSmiths’ exclusive agreement with Network Rail for newsagency units at UK rail terminuses.
  • Advising a major home improvement company in relation to a potential State Aid objection to lending extended by a State-owned bank to a competitor in which the bank owned a large stake.
  • Advising a major duty free retailer on the legality of BAA’s exclusive arrangement with World Duty Free.

Our team

Download our easy-to-follow guide to making a claim

We explain how our Truck Cartel litigation process works and how it will benefit your business.

Download our essential guideDownload our essential guide

Why choose our consortium?

We are focused on claims by those who operate large fleets as an adjunct to their primary business activity, or those who have similarly large logistics outsourcing arrangements with independent hauliers. We have a particularly focus on those operating within the retail supply chain, from manufacturers through to end retailers. 

As we are forming a Group Action this will allow your claim to proceed more quickly through the courts than a Class Action. As the action will be brought in the English courts, it will be less complex and more familiar to you than claims run by some other groups.

Our proposed claimant group is large enough to ensure you receive the benefits of economies of scale but also small enough to give you a meaningful voice where necessary in determining the direction of the litigation, something other larger groups will not provide. We ensure each claimant’s claim is assessed fully and individually.

Read more >

Our consortium consists of experts who together have developed a structure bespoke to the needs of this claim and the claimant profile:

  • Collyer Bristow LLP – a leading law firm with a specialisation in litigation and competition law, with offices in Central London and Geneva. A core team will be working on the Truck Cartel claim.
  • Grant Thornton UK LLP – one of the world’s leading professional accounting and consultancy firms, with a Competition Disputes team experienced in quantifying damages claims and managing multi-claimant litigation processes.
  • London Economics – one of Europe’s most respected specialist policy and economics consultants, with particular expertise in regulation and competition.
  • Vannin Capital – the global litigation funding business with over US$500m of investment capital, having funded a significant number of group actions.
  • Philip Moser QC and Philip Woolfe, barristers at Monckton Chambers – leading competition law specialists at one of the country’s top competition law chambers.

“As a larger truck fleet owner that has potentially been overcharged by 10% or more per truck, claiming for eligible vehicles in your fleet could yield a very substantial amount. Choosing the right litigation partner is vital to obtaining maximum returns for your business"Nick Wood, Partner, Grant Thornton UK LLP

Truck manufacturers have driven up vehicle prices and compensation can now be claimed

Your questions answered

We provide full details to potential claimants prior to commencing work. The questions we’re most frequently asked up-front are:

  • How much compensation will I receive?

    You could be entitled to substantial compensation. We will calculate a claim for your individual company rather than assigning a generalised 'per truck' value across all claimants. This ensures we claim the true value of your loss.

  • What are the costs of bringing this action?

    None. The claimants will not be responsible for paying any of the costs of the claim. Collyer Bristow and the barristers are agreeing to waive some – and Grant Thornton are agreeing to waive all – of their fees unless the litigation is successful, in which case they are paid out of the damages, with no recourse against the claimants. The balance of Collyer Bristow’s and the barristers’ fees along with all other costs are paid by the litigation funder in exchange for a share of the damages.

  • Will the collection of evidence to prove the claim be time-consuming?

    The long-running period of cartel collusion impacts positively on the size of the claim, as the compound interest on damages could be as much as the damages themselves. However, we appreciate that company records stretching back this far might be difficult to obtain. We can provide support in the collection of data to evidence your claim. Initially only a high-level analysis will be required to provide an estimate of the quantum of your damages. If the case progresses to formal disclosure, we will need to undertake a more thorough search for relevant paper and electronic documents in your possession.

  • We outsourced transportation to a haulier. Will our claim affect our relationship with them?

    The claim is being brought against the manufacturers’ cartel, not against your hauliers. It may be that your hauliers will bring their own claims. If they do, it is inevitable that their claims will be brought with a different nuance to yours. The hauliers will argue that they suffered the loss of the increased truck costs. Your claim will be based on the argument that the hauliers increased their own prices and passed the loss on to you. We will be guided by you as to how much you want to involve your hauliers. They could hold useful information about your claim which you may wish to request from them. However, it is possible to run your claim without involving them using other parties’ data and/or reasonable assumptions.

  • What are the risks of having to pay the opponent’s costs?

    Claimants in our group will have the benefit of an After The Event (ATE) insurance policy giving a high degree of protection against the risk of being ordered to pay opponent's costs. As the case progresses, there may be applications to court to resolve procedural disputes. Losing such an application could result in a comparatively minor costs award. The ATE we are obtaining is likely to be more than enough to cover such adverse costs. The general rule is that the loser pays the winner’s costs. In this case, liability is already established – the claim is only about ascertaining the level of damages to be paid – so it is hard to imagine how the claim could be lost. Whilst it can never be impossible that claimants may have to pay something towards the defendants’ costs, in our view the possibility is remote.

  • Might I have to pay anything other than the opponents’ costs?

    The only possibility we can conceive of is that the defendants may apply for “security for costs”, where a claimant is ordered to make a payment as security for a possible future order to pay an opponent’s costs. If those costs did not ultimately have to be paid, the security would be returned. In any case, we believe it is highly unlikely that there would be an order to pay security for costs.

  • How will the claim be managed?

    In order to minimise the time you must dedicate to the litigation and to reduce our administrative costs in running it, clients will sign a Litigation Management Agreement under which Grant Thornton will make day-to-day decisions. Periodic updates will be emailed to clients and important decisions will be put to a vote.

  • Why are you not acting for hauliers?

    We considered with Counsel whether our group could also include hauliers. However, we decided that this would cause a conflict of interests because hauliers and outsourcers would make conflicting pass-on arguments, so that if we acted for hauliers it would restrict the value of the claim we could argue on behalf of our other clients.

  • How will the quantum/value of our claim be assessed?

    We will use your data, the data of your co-claimants, the data disclosed by the defendants and externally-sourced market data. Grant Thornton’s forensic analysis of that data will be merged with economic analysis provided by our experts, London Economics. It is unlikely that we will be able to gather a complete and perfect set of data. However, this is usual in these types of claims and the court can be expected to adopt a sympathetic approach; cartels are always secret so claims dating back years are common. Incomplete data will not prevent you bringing a claim. London Economics can construct models which plug gaps in your data by extrapolating from other sources (particularly co-claimants’ data) or making reasoned assumptions to construct the likely true position.

  • I am not a UK company. Can I join your action?

    Yes. Two of the cartelists are domiciled in England. The EU regulations on jurisdiction are that the English-domiciled cartelists may be sued in England and, in that case, the non-English cartelists may be joined as defendants in the same action.

  • Can I claim for truck purchases made outside the UK?

    Yes, for purchases within the European Union or European Economic Area, depending on the jurisdiction. Some countries have statutes of limitations under which claims against the trucks cartel may be time-barred. We will assess claims on a case by case basis.

For more details of our bespoke claims service for larger fleets and fleet owners, please download our guidedownload our guide.

Download our essential guideDownload our essential guide

Essential facts for claimants

MAN, Volvo/Renault, Daimler (Mercedes), Iveco and DAF have admitted that they unlawfully coordinated prices, delayed the introduction of Euro 3 to Euro 6 emission technologies and coordinated the passing of the cost of those technologies on to their customers. On 19 July 2016, the European Commission fined them €2.9 billion for this conduct.

Scania made no admission but, on 27 September 2017, the Commission found that they too had participated in the cartel and fined Scania €880 million.

The cartel ran from at least 1997 to 2011, and covered medium (6 – 16 tonnes) and heavy trucks (over 16 tonnes).

 

Read more >

If you purchased new medium or heavy trucks between 1997 and 2011, you almost certainly have a case for compensation – whether you bought the trucks (outright or on hire purchase) or leased them, directly from a manufacturer or from a supplier.

Crucially, it also applies whatever make of truck you bought during this time, as the cartel’s price fixing may have artificially raised the prices of all medium or heavy trucks.

For more details please download our guide or call Stephen Critchley on +44 (0)20 7470 4523 or email here.

 

Contact us to discuss your claim.

Call Stephen Critchley, on
+44 (0)20 7470 4523 or email here

Contact us to discuss your claim.

Call Stephen Critchley, on
+44 (0)20 7470 4523 or email here

Stephen Critchley is Head of Competition Law at Collyer Bristow and will lead our core team of dedicated litigation lawyers. He specialises in complex, high-value commercial disputes and acted for the claimant in the UK’s first, and still leading, damages claim for breach of competition law.

Find out more about Stephen >Find out more about Stephen >

Stephen acted for the claimant in Inntrepreneur Pub Co (CPC) v Crehan, the first and still the leading claim for damages for breach of competition law in the UK.

Other experience includes:

  • Defending one of the “big four” UK mobile networks against a claim for alleged abuse of dominance in refusing to configure its switches to recognise the number-range of a competitor.
  • Representing a household-name telecommunications company accused of an anticompetitive agreement to prevent the landing of subsea cables into the UK, allegedly to close the UK market off from competition.
  • Advising a drugs company in relation to investigation by the Competition & Markets Authority of suspected excessive pricing following a six-fold price increase after its drug was released from NHS price control.
  • Advising a major overseas newsagent on the legality of WHSmiths’ exclusive agreement with Network Rail for newsagency units at UK rail terminuses.
  • Advising a major home improvement company in relation to a potential State Aid objection to lending extended by a State-owned bank to a competitor in which the bank owned a large stake.
  • Advising a major duty free retailer on the legality of BAA’s exclusive arrangement with World Duty Free.

Download our easy to read guide

Truck Cartel Litigation GuideFor a detailed overview of how our Truck Cartel litigation works and how it will benefit your business, fill out your details in the form below.