Mexico’s Federal Commission of Economic Competition has fined the airlines Aerovías de México (Aeromexico), Mexicana de Aviación (Mexicana) and three individuals involved in absolute monopolistic practices in the passenger air transport services market.
The airlines have been fined for their use of contracts, agreements, arrangements or deals intended to manipulate the prices they would charge users through the establishment of base or minimum prices on various routes in and out of Mexico, with said agreements happening between April 2008 and February 2010.
According to the investigation launched in February 2015, various individuals acting on behalf of these airlines exchanged information on their rates in order to define the base or minimum price for the air transport service of each economic agent on certain routes. This was done through multiple emails from official and unofficial accounts, which were also used to monitor the cartel participants’ adherence to the agreements.
Consequently, COFECE have decided to fine Aeromexico with for $86,190,000 pesos (US$4.5 million). While Mexicana would have been subject to a similar fine, the decision was made to impose the minimum amount applicable because the company has been declared bankrupt. Finally, fines were applied to three individuals for a total amount of $2,020,972 pesos (US$105,340).
In response, Aeroméxico announced its disagreement with the decision, describing the resolution as “discriminatory and untimely, as it refers to alleged events that occurred a decade ago and involves a company that has suspended operations for more than eight years.” The airline said it will fight the resolution through legal means.
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
CVS Health Explores Potential Breakup Amid Investor Pressure: Report
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
DirecTV Acquires Dish TV, Creating 20 Million-Subscriber Powerhouse
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea Fines Kakao Mobility $54.8 Million for Anti-Competitive Practices
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Google Offers Settlement in India’s Antitrust Case Regarding Smart TVs
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Attorney Challenges NCAA’s $2.78 Billion Settlement in Landmark Antitrust Cases
Oct 3, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh