The CJEU, Europe’s highest court, rejected a complaint from Pilkington about the sales figures and exchange rate used to calculate the fine.
The European Commission imposed the fine on Pilkington in 2008, when it found the company guilty of price fixing in the market for car glass between 1998 and 2002.
The fine calculation included contracts that were negotiated before the cartel was in place, Pilkington said. The glassmaker also said that the exchange rate used to convert its sterling-based sales figures into euros had cost it an extra €40 million.
CJEU advocate general Juliane Kolkott said that the whole turnover achieved should be used to calculate a fine when the object of a cartel is to distort competition. To use only some sales figures would “artificially reduce the economic effect of the cartel” and would also involve a disproportionate effort by the court, she said.
On the exchange rate, Pilkington argued that the Commission should have used the European Central Bank exchange rate on the day it made the decision rather than an average for the previous year. Kolkott said that this would have been “comparing apples and pears”, applying a new exchange rate to old figures. The average rate “reflects the economic realities” over the course of the year, she said.
A further appeal concerning the automotive glass cartel is currently pending before the CJEU. However, it does not challenge the same judgment of the General Court and raises entirely different legal issues, the CJEU said.
Full Content: Out-Law
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand