Enron Coal Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd

Enron Coal Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd

The Tribunal was correct to require ECSL to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that it would have sought to negotiate and had a real or substantial chance of securing a contract with EME but for EWS' infringement. The ORR's findings did not establish causation or loss, nor did they contain binding findings of fact on these issues. The Tribunal's conclusions were not inconsistent with the ORR's decision or findings. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Enron Coal Services Ltd (in liquidation); Defendant/respondent: English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (competition Law) / Appeal From Competition Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominant Position, Article 82 EC Treaty (now Article 102 Tfeu), Chapter II Prohibition (competition Act 1998), Follow on Damages Claims, Binding Effect of Regulatory Findings, Causation and Quantum in Competition Damages
Competition Law European Union Law Commercial Law Abuse of Dominant Position Article 82 EC Treaty (now Article 102 Tfeu) Chapter II Prohibition (competition Act 1998) Follow on Damages Claims Binding Effect of Regulatory Findings +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Enron Coal Services Ltd (in liquidation)

Claimant/appellant

English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (competition Law) / Appeal From Competition Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in its approach to findings of fact and law made by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) and their binding effect under section 58 of the Competition Act 1998.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal's findings on causation and quantum were inconsistent with the ORR's decision and findings of fact.
  3. 3 Whether ECSL was placed at a competitive disadvantage by EWS' discriminatory conduct and whether this caused loss.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was correct to require ECSL to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that it would have sought to negotiate and had a real or substantial chance of securing a contract with EME but for EWS' infringement. The ORR's findings did not establish causation or loss, nor did they contain binding findings of fact on these issues. The Tribunal's conclusions were not inconsistent with the ORR's decision or findings. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.