NTN Corporation & Ors. v Stellantis N.V. & Ors.

NTN Corporation & Ors. v Stellantis N.V. & Ors.

A bare or theoretical pleading of mitigation by off-setting, unsupported by factual particularisation or evidence of a causal link between the overcharge and cost reductions elsewhere, does not meet the required standard for a viable defence and may be struck out. The CAT applied the correct legal test and made no error of law in refusing permission to advance the off-setting defence.

Parties
Appellant / Defendant: NTN Corporation; Appellant / Defendant: NTN Wälzlager (Europa) GmbH; Appellant / Defendant: NTN-SNR Roulements SA; Respondent / Claimant: Stellantis N.V.; Respondent / Claimant: FCA Italy S.P.A.; Respondent / Claimant: FCA Srbija D.O.O.; Respondent / Claimant: FCA Poland S.A.; Respondent / Claimant: Maserati S.P.A.; Respondent / Claimant: Sevel S.P.A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Competition Appeal Tribunal on Point of Law
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Mitigation of Loss, Cartel Damages, Pleading Standards, Breach of Statutory Duty, Causation, Summary Judgment
Competition Law Tort Law Contract Law Mitigation of Loss Cartel Damages Pleading Standards Breach of Statutory Duty Causation +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NTN Corporation

Appellant / Defendant

NTN Wälzlager (Europa) GmbH

Appellant / Defendant

NTN-SNR Roulements SA

Appellant / Defendant

Stellantis N.V.

Respondent / Claimant

FCA Italy S.P.A.

Respondent / Claimant

FCA Srbija D.O.O.

Respondent / Claimant

FCA Poland S.A.

Respondent / Claimant

Maserati S.P.A.

Respondent / Claimant

Sevel S.P.A.

Respondent / Claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Competition Appeal Tribunal on Point of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a defendant can plead mitigation by off-setting without factual evidence, relying only on hypothetical or theoretical inferences
  2. 2 Whether the Competition Appeal Tribunal erred in law by striking out the off-setting defence as speculative and lacking realism

Ratio Decidendi

A bare or theoretical pleading of mitigation by off-setting, unsupported by factual particularisation or evidence of a causal link between the overcharge and cost reductions elsewhere, does not meet the required standard for a viable defence and may be struck out. The CAT applied the correct legal test and made no error of law in refusing permission to advance the off-setting defence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed; CAT's order striking out the off-setting defence affirmed