`;
socialToolbar.insertAdjacentHTML(‘beforeend’, editButton);
}
– With a class action lawsuit, truck buyers want to collect half a billion euros in damages from the manufacturers because they exchanged prices. The appeals court gives them hope.
The Munich regional court has to reopen the largest damages lawsuit against a truck cartel. The Munich Higher Regional Court overturned the judgment made three years ago because the lawsuit was admissible, contrary to the regional court’s opinion.
But many questions are still unanswered: “The legal dispute is not ready for a decision at this point in time,” explained the Cartel Senate of the Higher Regional Court and therefore referred the proceedings back to the regional court for a new hearing.
The EU Commission had imposed fines of almost four billion euros on the truck companies DAF, Daimler, Iveco, Scania and Volvo/Renault because they exchanged sales prices between 1997 and 2011. MAN had gone unpunished as a key witness. The buyers of around 70,000 trucks that were allegedly overpriced are demanding 560 million euros in damages plus interest from MAN, Daimler, Iveco and Volvo/Renault. To do this, they have assigned their claims to the debt collection and legal service provider Financialright Claims: He acts as the sole plaintiff and, if successful, receives a 33 percent commission.
Reassessment in the appeal process
The collective situation failed in the first instance: the regional court rejected it in 2020 as partly inadmissible and partly unfounded. The plaintiff Financialright Claims is not entitled to claim because the assignments violate the Legal Services Act and are therefore void. However, the Higher Regional Court (OLG) came to a different assessment in the appeal process.
The Cartel Senate ruled that the plaintiff’s actions were covered by the debt collection authority. As the Federal Court of Justice has now decided several times, the invalidity of the assignment of claims requires a clear and not just a minor excess. That is not the case here.
The lawsuit concerns very different trucks and customers from all over Europe, claims in particularly complicated antitrust law, and also foreign law. Truck buyers and lessees should not be burdened with the risk of this assessment when the legal situation is difficult. Contrary to the truck manufacturers’ view, the lawsuit should not be dismissed because the debt collection and legal services company lacks standing.
The Senate also rejected the objection that the lawsuit was an abuse of law because of its extraordinary scope. The plaintiff is also not obliged to present its contract with a litigation funder. The truck manufacturers had demanded this on the grounds that the bundling of thousands of claims with completely different prospects of success and the economic dependence on one litigation financier made it difficult for Financialright Claims to conclude settlements.
The Higher Regional Court allowed the appeal to the Federal Court of Justice. Daimler Truck said the company was examining whether to take legal action. “We cannot understand the court’s decision.” Daimler emphasized that the judgment deals exclusively with formal preliminary questions of the lawsuit and makes no statement about possible damage. “We will continue to vigorously defend ourselves against unjustified claims.”
In 2016, the EU Commission found that truck manufacturers had violated the antitrust ban by agreeing on prices for medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks and on the timing and passing on of costs for the introduction of exhaust technology. The EU Commission left it open whether truck buyers suffered any damage as a result of the cartel. The truck manufacturers deny it.
2024-03-28 18:11:55
#Munich #Regional #Court #renegotiate #truck #cartel #case
