Judgment of the Tribunal concluding unanimously that the Claimants, Stellantis Auto SAS and Others, failed to establish that there was a cartel operating over the entire cartel period against any of the Claimant groups. The Tribunal further concludes that, insofar as there was any cartel activity within this period, the Claimants failed to show that it resulted in an overcharge.
The Claimants sought damages arising from the alleged involvement of the Defendants, Autoliv AB and Others, in one or more cartels in the market for occupant safety systems, in this case, seatbelts, airbags and steering wheels, beginning in either 2002 or 2004 and ending at least as late as March 2011, resulting in an overcharge incurred by the Claimants of between 10.8% and 25.9% over the cartel period.
The Claimants pleaded this overcharge on the basis of a direct and an indirect case. In summary, the direct case was that the Claimants incurred this overcharge on the basis of the alleged involvement by the Defendants in one or more cartels as against the Claimant groups, either individually, or as a whole. The indirect case was that the Claimants incurred this overcharge on the basis of alleged market distortion resulting from cartels involving the Defendants established in two Decisions of the European Commission.
The Tribunal found that the Claimants failed to establish any overcharge resulting from either the direct or the indirect case. As such, the question of pass-on did not arise, but the Tribunal considered it briefly, concluding that the Defendants' case thereon would have failed, had it arisen.
