-
a)
The empirical principle that market prices achieved within the framework of a cartel are on average higher than those that would have applied without the agreement restricting competition must also be applied when manufacturers agree on the list prices of a product, if the list prices form the basis of pricing at the manufacturer level and list price increases are indicative of cost increases in production for the manufacturers’ distribution companies not participating in the cartel or their independent dealers selling products who agree the transaction prices with the customers.
-
b)
In the case of cartel damages claims, for which the limitation period is suspended due to the initiation of proceedings by the European Commission for a cartel infringement pursuant to Sec. 33(5) Act against Restraints of Competition 2005, the six-month period of Sec. 204(2) of the German Civil Code does not begin with the notification of the penalty notice, but with the expiry of the time limit for bringing an action for annulment pursuant to Art. 263(4) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Author information
Consortia
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Translated from the German by David Wright. Official headnotes.
For a translation into English of the German Federal Supreme Court decision Truck Cartel, see this issue of IIC at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-022-01196-5.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Act against Restraints of Competition (2005), Sec. 33(3) and (5). “Truck Cartel II (LKW-Kartell II)”. IIC 53, 819–844 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-022-01197-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-022-01197-4