In a development reported by the Society for Action on Consumer Affairs, a notable case moved to court this Wednesday involving ten automobile manufacturers. The action seeks compensation for 766 members who purchased new vehicles from official dealers of these brands, alleging price increases during 2006 to 2013.
Legal actions target BMW Ibérica SA, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Spain SA, Ford España SL, Honda Motor Europe Ltd Spain branch, Hyundai Motor España SL, Nissan Iberia SA, PSAG Automóviles Comercial España SA, Opel España SL, Renault España Comercial SA, and Toyota Spain SL.
The latest filing arrived on Wednesday, April 12, continuing a line of proceedings that began last October. The cases have been heard in commercial courts across Spain, with Honda and Nissan headquartered in Barcelona, Renault in Valladolid, Opel in Zaragoza, and several other brands domiciled in Madrid.
Facua represents claimants from a group of 15 brands that allegedly formed a cartel to raise prices. The brands named include Alfa Romeo, BMW, Citroën, Dacia, Fiat, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Jeep, Lexus, Nissan, Opel, Peugeot, Renault, and Toyota.
Multiple Supreme Court decisions, numbering at least thirteen, have affirmed the CNMC’s conclusions from 2021. Individuals who opted to sue could face charges in the range of 1,500 to 3,000 euros on average. Regarding the automobile cartel, the theoretical window to file a claim is one year from the date the Supreme Court finalizes the sanction against the manufacturer, though questions linger in legal debates about its applicability and the potential for a five year period or joint responsibility across all brands. In this context, jurists have emphasized that a ruling by referees could set the ultimate boundaries, and some lawyers argue the litigation period may extend beyond the initially estimated year. A notable concept discussed is joint responsibility among cartel members. This would permit, for instance, a demand for a Seat vehicle alongside the assertion that brands should settle their accounts collectively.
In July 2015, the National Markets and Competition Commission CNMC issued a ruling penalizing numerous manufacturers for agreements to exchange commercially sensitive and strategic information connected to the distribution and marketing of all vehicles in Spain. Such practices are deemed anti-competitive and prohibited by law. The decision noted that competition defense often entails lower price variability and less aggressive marketing, while suppliers may reduce differentiation and innovation in service quality. The scope included about twenty companies that exchanged information on new and used vehicle sales, workshop services, repairs, maintenance, and official spare parts, with the involvement of two consulting firms to oversee the information exchange. CNMC asserted that these exchanges created artificial certainty about competitors’ trade policies.