Iiyama (UK) Ld ) & Ors v Samsung Electronics Co Ltd & Ors

Iiyama (UK) Ld ) & Ors v Samsung Electronics Co Ltd & Ors

Claimants have an arguable case that they suffered recoverable loss by reason of the implementation of the cartel in the EU, within the territorial scope of Article 101 TFEU, and there is a real prospect of success against D1 and D5. The claims against D2-D4 are also arguable. Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to serve out are dismissed. No material non-disclosure is found.

Parties
Claimant: IIYAMA (UK) LIMITED; Claimant: IIYAMA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH; Claimant: IIYAMA BENELUX BV; Claimant: IIYAMA POLSKA SP ZOO; Claimant: IIYAMA FRANCE SARL; Claimant: MOUSE COMPUTERS CO LIMITED; Defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LIMITED; Defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LIMITED; Defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS (UK) LIMITED; Defendant: SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR EUROPE LIMITED; Defendant: LG DISPLAY CO LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction, Permission to Amend)
Outcome
Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to serve out are dismissed. Claimants' application to amend is adjourned.
Legal Topics
Territorial Scope of Article 101 TFEU, Follow on Damages Claims, Implementation and Qualified Effects Tests, Jurisdiction Over Foreign Defendants, Joint and Several Liability in Cartel Cases, Passing on Defence, Pleading Requirements
Competition Law Private International Law Civil Procedure Territorial Scope of Article 101 TFEU Follow on Damages Claims Implementation and Qualified Effects Tests Jurisdiction Over Foreign Defendants Joint and Several Liability in Cartel Cases +2 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 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IIYAMA (UK) LIMITED

Claimant

IIYAMA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH

Claimant

IIYAMA BENELUX BV

Claimant

IIYAMA POLSKA SP ZOO

Claimant

IIYAMA FRANCE SARL

Claimant

MOUSE COMPUTERS CO LIMITED

Claimant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LIMITED

Defendant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LIMITED

Defendant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS (UK) LIMITED

Defendant

SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR EUROPE LIMITED

Defendant

LG DISPLAY CO LIMITED

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction, Permission to Amend)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the claim fall within the territorial scope of Article 101 TFEU?
  2. 2 Are losses claimed by the claimants recoverable under Article 101?
  3. 3 Is there a real prospect of success against D1 and D5 for permission to serve out?

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants have an arguable case that they suffered recoverable loss by reason of the implementation of the cartel in the EU, within the territorial scope of Article 101 TFEU, and there is a real prospect of success against D1 and D5. The claims against D2-D4 are also arguable. Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to serve out are dismissed. No material non-disclosure is found.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to serve out are dismissed. Claimants' application to amend is adjourned.

Orders

  • Applications by D1 and D5 regarding jurisdiction and permission to serve out are dismissed.
  • Applications by D2 to D4 to strike out and/or for summary judgment are dismissed.