National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc v ABB Ltd & Ors

National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc v ABB Ltd & Ors

The court held that the ECJ's ruling in Pfleiderer applies to Commission leniency materials and that the English court has jurisdiction to order disclosure under its own procedural rules. The balancing exercise required by Pfleiderer must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, considering the relevance and necessity of the documents, the lack of alternative sources, and the potential impact on the effectiveness of leniency programmes. Only those passages of the confidential Decision and certain responses to the Commission's information requests that are of real assistance and relevance to the issues in the case should be disclosed. The remainder of the leniency materials are not...

Parties
Claimant: National Grid Electricity Transmission PLC; Defendant: ABB Ltd; Defendant: ABB Power T&D Limited; Defendant: ABB Limited; Defendant: ABB Holdings Limited; Defendant: ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd; Defendant: Alstom; Defendant: Alstom Limited; Defendant: Alstom UK Holdings Limited; Defendant: Alstom Holdings; Defendant: Areva SA; Defendant: Alstom Grid (UK) Limited (formerly Areva T&D UK Limited); Defendant: T&D Holding (formerly Areva T&D Holding SA); Defendant: Siemens AG; Defendant: Siemens Transmission & Distribution Limited; Defendant: VA Tech Reyrolle Distribution Limited; Defendant: Siemens PLC; Defendant: VA Tech (UK) Limited; Defendant: Siemens Holdings PLC; Defendant: VA Tech Schneider High Voltage GMBH; Defendant: VA Tech Transmission & Distribution GMBH & Co KEG; Defendant: Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich; Defendant: Alstom Grid SAS (formerly Areva T&D SA); Defendant: Alstom Grid AG (formerly Areva T&D AG)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Competition Damages Claim / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Further Information
Outcome
Application for disclosure granted in part; application for further information under CPR Part 18 dismissed except as to clarification of a specific document by Siemens.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Leniency Materials, Follow on Damages Claims, Jurisdiction of National Courts, Application of EU Law, Cartel Damages, Civil Procedure Requests for Further Information
Competition Law Civil Procedure European Union Law Disclosure of Leniency Materials Follow on Damages Claims Jurisdiction of National Courts Application of EU Law Cartel Damages +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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Grid Electricity Transmission PLC

Claimant

ABB Ltd

Defendant

ABB Power T&D Limited

Defendant

ABB Limited

Defendant

ABB Holdings Limited

Defendant

ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd

Defendant

Alstom

Defendant

Alstom Limited

Defendant

Alstom UK Holdings Limited

Defendant

Alstom Holdings

Defendant

Areva SA

Defendant

Alstom Grid (UK) Limited (formerly Areva T&D UK Limited)

Defendant

T&D Holding (formerly Areva T&D Holding SA)

Defendant

Siemens AG

Defendant

Siemens Transmission & Distribution Limited

Defendant

VA Tech Reyrolle Distribution Limited

Defendant

Siemens PLC

Defendant

VA Tech (UK) Limited

Defendant

Siemens Holdings PLC

Defendant

VA Tech Schneider High Voltage GMBH

Defendant

VA Tech Transmission & Distribution GMBH & Co KEG

Defendant

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich

Defendant

Alstom Grid SAS (formerly Areva T&D SA)

Defendant

Alstom Grid AG (formerly Areva T&D AG)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Competition Damages Claim / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Further Information

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court can order disclosure of leniency materials submitted to the European Commission in cartel proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the ECJ's ruling in Pfleiderer applies to Commission leniency materials as well as national leniency programmes.
  3. 3 Whether the national court or the Commission has jurisdiction to determine disclosure of such materials.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the ECJ's ruling in Pfleiderer applies to Commission leniency materials and that the English court has jurisdiction to order disclosure under its own procedural rules. The balancing exercise required by Pfleiderer must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, considering the relevance and necessity of the documents, the lack of alternative sources, and the potential impact on the effectiveness of leniency programmes. Only those passages of the confidential Decision and certain responses to the Commission's information requests that are of real assistance and relevance to the issues in the case should be disclosed. The remainder of the leniency materials are not...

Court Disposition

Application for disclosure granted in part; application for further information under CPR Part 18 dismissed except as to clarification of a specific document by Siemens.

Orders

  • ABB and Siemens to disclose specified passages of the confidential version of the Commission Decision and certain responses to information requests, as listed in the Appendix, within the confidentiality ring.
  • Siemens to provide clarification regarding the 'UK forum' as referenced in a disclosed document.