Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Granville Technology Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd & Ors

[2024] EWHC 13 (Comm)
Several companies sued because of a price-fixing scheme for computer screens. The judge decided the companies that were suing did overpay a bit, but also raised prices themselves. They got some money back, but less than they wanted because they also raised prices. The judge also decided they were allowed to sue even though the scheme happened a long time ago and the companies suing were already bankrupt.

Key Facts

  • Follow-on claim for damages due to LCD panel price-fixing cartel (2001-2006).
  • Claimants: Granville Technology Group Ltd (in liquidation), VMT Ltd (in liquidation), OT Computers Ltd (in liquidation).
  • Defendants: Innolux Corporation, Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd, LG Display Co. Ltd, LG Display Taiwan Co Ltd, Samsung Electronics Co. Limited, Samsung Electronics Taiwan Co Ltd.
  • EU Commission Decision (2010) found cartel infringement.
  • Claimants allege overcharge, loss of profits on lost sales, and interest.
  • Defendants deny loss, citing downstream pass-on and other defenses (limitation, foreign law).

Legal Principles

Competition law infringement claims are tortious claims for breach of statutory duty.

Garden Cottage Foods Ltd v Milk Marketing Board [1984] A.C. 130; Cooper Tire & Rubber Company Europe Ltd v Dow Deutschland Inc [2010] EWCA Civ 864

High Court bound by Commission's infringement decisions in follow-on claims; claimant must prove loss.

Cooper Tire Europe Limited

Measure of loss in competition claims: overcharge attributable to cartel activity less any pass-on to downstream customers.

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Mastercard Inc and others [2020] UKSC 24

English law requires consideration of downstream pass-on in assessing damages.

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Mastercard Inc and others

Limitation period starts when claimant has sufficient confidence to justify commencing claim preliminaries (knowing of cartel and participants).

Gemalto Holding BV and others v Infineon Technologies AG and others [2022] EWCA Civ 782

In insolvency, limitation test considers what a reasonably diligent insolvency practitioner could have discovered.

OT Computers Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Infineon Technologies AG and another [2021] EWCA Civ 501

EU competition law applies to agreements implemented in the EU, regardless of where formed; qualified effects doctrine applies.

Re Wood Pulp Cartel; Gencor Ltd v E.C. Commission; Intel Corporation Inc v European Commission

Claim for interest as damages requires pleading and proof of actual interest losses.

Sempra Metals Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners; Sagicor Bank Jamaica Ltd v Seaton

Outcomes

Overcharge rates: 8% for monitors, 4% for notebooks, 14% for TVs.

Preference for Parker's multiple regression analysis; adjustments for endogeneity risk and post-cartel price persistence.

Upstream pass-on: 100%.

Low intermediary margins; economic theory.

Downstream pass-on: 65%.

Economic theory, limited documentary evidence; balancing compensation with caution due to uncertainty.

Volume of commerce: Accepted claimants' figures with adjustments.

Management accounts provide best estimate; adjustments for lost invoices and product types.

Limitation defense rejected.

Claimants in liquidation; reasonable diligence standard for insolvency practitioners; publication of Commission's Statement of Objections was not reasonably discoverable given the circumstances.

Applicable law: English law.

Claim falls within EU competition law's territorial scope; most significant elements in England and Wales.

Interest awarded: Base rate + 2.5% pre-insolvency, compounded quarterly; base rate + 2.5% post-insolvency.

Proof of actual losses, considering borrowing rates; statutory interest post-insolvency.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.