Arkin v Borchard Lines Ltd. & Ors

Arkin v Borchard Lines Ltd. & Ors

The court held that although the defendant conferences retained a dominant position during the relevant period, the claimant failed to prove that the conferences abused that position by predatory pricing, use of fighting ships, or rumour-mongering. The conferences' pricing conduct was found to be competitive and not motivated by eliminatory intent. The Block Exemption applied as the conferences charged uniform rates, and no actionable breach of Article 81 was established. Even if there had been a breach, the predominant cause of the claimant's losses was its own irrational and loss-making conduct, breaking the chain of causation. The claim was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Yeheskel Arkin; Defendant: Borchard Lines Limited; Part 20 Defendants: ZIM Israel Navigation Company Ltd & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Trial (competition Law Damages Claim) / Final Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominant Position (article 82/102 Tfeu), Anti Competitive Agreements (article 81/101 Tfeu), Block Exemption for Liner Conferences, Predatory Pricing, Fighting Ships, Causation and Damages in Competition Law, Severance Under Block Exemption, Ex Turpi Causa Defence, Quantification of Damages
Competition Law Commercial Law European Union Law Abuse of Dominant Position (article 82/102 Tfeu) Anti Competitive Agreements (article 81/101 Tfeu) Block Exemption for Liner Conferences Predatory Pricing Fighting Ships +4 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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yeheskel Arkin

Claimant

Borchard Lines Limited

Defendant

ZIM Israel Navigation Company Ltd & Ors

Part 20 Defendants

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Trial (competition Law Damages Claim) / Final Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant liner conferences held a dominant position in the relevant market during the relevant period
  2. 2 Whether the defendants abused any dominant position by predatory pricing, use of fighting ships, or rumour-mongering
  3. 3 Whether the defendants breached Article 81 by anti-competitive agreements or practices not protected by the Block Exemption

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that although the defendant conferences retained a dominant position during the relevant period, the claimant failed to prove that the conferences abused that position by predatory pricing, use of fighting ships, or rumour-mongering. The conferences' pricing conduct was found to be competitive and not motivated by eliminatory intent. The Block Exemption applied as the conferences charged uniform rates, and no actionable breach of Article 81 was established. Even if there had been a breach, the predominant cause of the claimant's losses was its own irrational and loss-making conduct, breaking the chain of causation. The claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed