Introduction On 11 January 2026, the Court of Milan, Business Section A (the ‘Court’), delivered a significant ruling[1] in follow-on antitrust damages litigation brought by 18 transport companies against Iveco and the other major truck manufacturers MAN, DAF, Scania, Mercedes-Benz (Daimler), and Volvo/Renault. The case stems from the European Commission’s (‘Commission’) landmark decision (the ‘EC […]
A 5% Overcharge as Minimum Damages for Antitrust Violations?! Recent Developments in Europe
Courts throughout Europe increasingly adopt a minimum damages approach in antitrust cases, unanimously presuming at least a 5% overcharge, driven by grounds of compensation, effectiveness and deterrence. Recent judgments – from the CAT (UK) to the Spanish Supreme Court, Norway’s courts, the Court of Appeal in Stuttgart, the Dieselgate rulings of the German and Austrian Supreme Courts, and finally the European Court of Justice – point to a converging practice and a structured approach to quantifying damages across the EU.
Spanish Supreme Court confirms judgment awarding overcharge in excess of 10% in the trucks cartel: key takeaways from judgment STS 5861/2025
The Supreme Court Judgment STS 5861/2025 of 18 December 2025 represents a significant development in damages litigation arising from the trucks cartel in Spain as it confirms for the first time the judicial estimation of a second instance court awarding an overcharge of more than 10%. The Supreme Court has fully dismissed the appeals brought […]
Tribunal Supremo on trucks cartel, judicial estimation after Tráficos Manuel Ferrer: Judges can estimate without prior disclosure, judicial estimate of 5% overcharge confirmed
In a bundle of 15 cassation judgments, the Tribunal Supremo, the highest civil court in Spain, rules on important questions concerning the ability of the judge to estimate the damage, the need for prior inter partes disclosure, proportionality, and standards for economic expert opinions. The Tribunal does so against the background of the European trucks cartel, the same case that prompted the preliminary ruling in Tráficos Manuel Ferrer. The Tribunal largely upholds the findings of the appellate courts and strengthens the ability of judges to estimate damage. The court also rules, among other questions, on the accrual of interest and limitation.
Tráficos Manuel Ferrer – a warning to claimants and defendants alike
Shortly after the publication of the Tráficos Manuel Ferrer judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in response to a request for a preliminary ruling (16 February 2023), the judge from the Valencia court who had referred the questions to the CJEU delivered his judgment in the same case (10 March 2023). This blog post analyses the key points of the Valencia court judgment concerning economic expert reports.
Trucks cartel: Portuguese competition court grants a 15.4% compensation and applies its national law in line with recent EU case law
On 6 November 2022, the Portuguese Competition, Regulation and Supervision Court of Santarém rendered a key judgment in relation to damages proceedings against participants in the European Trucks Cartel. The Court addressed key points, such as the standard of proof, limitation periods, and net price effects in a comprehensive EU case law state of play-based interpretation of national law. Granting the 15.4% overcharge identified in the claimant’s expert report and rejecting the defendant’s “no damage” argumentation, this judgment will have a positive impact beyond the Trucks Cartel case.
Trucks cartel: New CJEU landmark judgement empowers victims of antitrust infringements with the right to request ex novo documents, created by the defendants (C-163/21, PACCAR e.a.)
On 10 November 2022, the EU Court of Justice rendered another key judgment in relation to the series of damages proceedings brought in Spain against participants in the European Trucks Cartel. This judgment on the interpretation of Art. 5(1) of the Damages Directive clarifies the wide scope of evidence to which claimants can request access to substantiate potential damages claims. The judgment further strengthens the effectiveness of private enforcement of EU competition rules and should have a positive impact on the whole wave of compensation claims against truck manufacturers in Europe.
Trucks cartel: District Court of Amsterdam confirms the possibility for entities to bundle multiple damage claims in one action and applies uniformly Dutch law to those claims
On 27 July 2022, the District Court of Amsterdam delivered an important judgment in which it confirmed previous case law of Dutch courts on the validity of the ‘assignment model’, by which entities, such as CDC, effectively bundle multiple damage claims in one single action. The judgment is in line with EU law, in particular the principle of effectiveness. By choosing Dutch law as the law applicable to all damage claims, the Court has provided an effective solution for victims of competition law infringements.
When is a truck a truck? Defining the relevant products for cartel damages claims
On 1 August 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled in Case C-588/20 Daimler (Ententes – Camions à ordures ménageres) that specialised trucks are covered by the cartel found in the European Commission’s 2016 decision in Case AT.39824 Trucks. The judgment concerns the fundamental and practically relevant question of how to identify the products directly affected by a cartel infringement according to the decision of a competition authority, which in this respect is binding for the civil courts in a follow-on action for damages. As a result, the right of injured parties to access the Statement of Objections sent by that authority to the cartelists prior to the adoption of the decision will gain in importance, especially if this decision has finally been adopted after a settlement.
Trucks Cartel: the Supreme Court of Norway confirms jurisdiction of the Norwegian courts for follow-on damage action based on the principles of joint and several liability and the civil liability of the ‘undertaking’
In an interesting decision the Supreme Court of Norway confirms jurisdiction of the Norwegian courts for a follow-on damage action based on the principles of joint and several liability and the civil liability of the ‘undertaking’.