1 / 10

Hypothetical – Recap and Report Back

This report summarizes the 2012 ICN Cartel Workshop held in Panama City, focusing on a hypothetical case involving the crop protection chemical market. Key participants included representatives from Canada and Australia discussing anti-competitive practices among three major companies: CropPro, AgForce, and RuralPro. Together, these firms control 60% of the global market. The case involved alleged coordination to undermine generics and inflate prices, leading to dawn raids and subsequent investigations. The implications for competition law and private enforcement issues were also addressed.

fergal
Download Presentation

Hypothetical – Recap and Report Back

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ICN Cartel Workshop, Panama City 2012 Hypothetical – Recap and Report Back Lindsay Donders Competition Bureau Canada Richard Fleming Australia Competition and Consumer Commission

  2. Hypothetical – the industry • Crop protection chemical market. • Annual Chemical Association Conference. • Technical Committee responsible for collecting and circulating market intelligence.

  3. Hypothetical – the parties (1) • CropPro • Immunity applicant • US $600 million per year • AgForce • US $900 million per year • Allegedly initiated the agreements • Chair of the Technical Committee • Rural Pro • US $600 million per year

  4. Hypothetical – the parties (2) • Together, CropPro, AgForce, and RuralPro make up 60% of the global crop protection chemical market. • Each company has: • Manufacturing facilities around the world; and, • A sales office in the capital city of all countries with ICN membership.

  5. Hypothetical – the offence (1) • Arrangements to minimize the financial impact of the biggest selling crop protection chemicals coming off patent. • Prevent the emergence of new competitors manufacturing low cost generics. • Each company agreed to manufactured a generic version.

  6. Hypothetical – the offence (2) • Agreed to price differential between generic and branded products – generics sold at 60% of branded price. • Limit the possibility of excess production by scheduled “maintenance” of production facilities. • Discussion and email exchange of pricing information between competitors at local sales offices.

  7. Hypothetical – the information sharing • Marker management. • Coordination of enforcement actions. • Confidentiality. • Waivers.

  8. Hypothetical – the dawn raids • Searches/raids/inspections of the targets in a number of jurisdictions. • Evidence obtained: • E-mails/faxes between competitors; • Know-how agreements; • Annual reports; • Sales data; and, • Monthly bulletins. • Evidence obtained supports CropPro’s information.

  9. Hypothetical – the investigation • Following the raids, AgForce sought leniency in a number of jurisdictions. • Witness interviews. • Document production.

  10. Hypothetical – private enforcement issues • A large customer has sued CropPro for raising prices of crop protection chemicals, which prevented a generic competitor from selling chemicals to the customer.

More Related