GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL AGAINST VFS FINANCIAL SERVICES AND OTHERS AND WEST DUNBARTONSHIRE COUNCIL AGAINST VFS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD AND OTHERS [2020] ScotCS CSOH_92 (11 November 2020)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Damages Action (follow on Competition Law Claim) / Preliminary Proof Before Answer on Prescription Issues

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the pursuers' claims for cartel damages are extinguished by short or long negative prescription under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
2. 2 Whether the running of prescription was postponed by section 6(4) (fraud/error) or section 11(3) (lack of awareness of loss)
3. 3 Whether the principle of effectiveness under EU law requires postponement or disapplication of prescription

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the running of prescription was not postponed until publication of the Commission Decision in July 2016. The concealment of the cartel ended, and the prescriptive period began to run, when the existence of the investigations was publicly reported in 2010 and 2011. The information available at that time was sufficient to put the pursuers on notice and trigger a duty of reasonable diligence. Neither section 6(4) nor section 11(3) of the 1973 Act postponed prescription, and the principle of effectiveness under EU law did not require a different result. Accordingly, the pursuers' claims are extinguished by prescription.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed as extinguished by prescription

Orders

• Pursuers' claims are dismissed as prescribed under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
• Claims in respect of vehicles other than medium and heavy trucks are excluded from probation