The Chilean Tribunal for the Defense of Free Competition (TDLC) gave its verdict on a car cartel case which started in 2015. NYK and MOL were fined with $9.1 million, whilst exempting or acquitting for other companies.
The companies involved in the case were the Chilean Compañia Sudamericana de Vapores (CSAV) and Compañia Maritima de Chile (CMC) as well as the Eukor Car Carriers Inc. (Eukor), K-Line, Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL), and NYK. Compañia Maritima de Chile (CMC) was formerly known as Chilean Interoceanic Navigation Company (CCNI). 3Chilean Compañia Sudamericana de Vapores (CSAV) had gotten compensation.
In January 2015, the National Economic Prosecutor’s Office (FNE) filed a collusion requirement against shipping companies, six of them in total, for making and executing an agreement that avoided competition within the service contracting processes of transport of vehicles from Europe, Asia, and America to Chile. This was partially accepted by the Tribunal for the Defense of Free Competition (TDLC).
Chilean Compañía Sudamericana de Vapores (CSAV) was exempted from a fine after revealing the agreement. This is while the Japanese got considered as a second reporter, gaining a reduced fine of 6.6 million dollars from the Court. Meanwhile, MOL got a $2.5 million fine.
This is bad news compared with what CMC, Eukor, and K-line got – a non-conviction. This was due to the fact that TDLC accepted prescription exception that these companies had filed with regards to the routes from Asian ports.
After the verdict, the parties were given 10 working days to give a claim to the Supreme Court of Chile.
CSAV released a statement saying that in September of 2012, they had received information requests from Canada and the United States regarding the agreements among the shipping companies in the vehicle transportation from 2000 and September of 2012, which they provided with a maximum collaboration in research in development in various jurisdictions where their services have operated. They added that they had denounced the case even before FNE accepted the compensation mechanism.
They went on to say that they reject practices that are against the current legislation.