Argos Ltd & Littlewoods Ltd v Office of Fair Trading
[2006] EWCA Civ 1318
판결 이유
Price-fixing agreements between retailers facilitated by a supplier constitute horizontal concerted practices caught by the Chapter I prohibition, even when the communication passes through a vertical hub-and-spoke arrangement.
사실관계
The OFT found that Argos and Littlewoods had fixed the prices of certain toys and games through Hasbro, the supplier. Hasbro acted as a conduit for retail pricing intentions between the two competing retailers. Both retailers appealed the OFT's infringement decision.
판결 요약
The Court of Appeal upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal's decision, confirming that indirect price-fixing through a hub-and-spoke arrangement, where a supplier relays pricing intentions between competing retailers, amounts to a concerted practice under the Competition Act 1998. The court held that the essential element is whether confidential pricing information was exchanged with the knowledge or foresight that it would be shared with competitors.
주요 인용문
"The economic effect of an A–B–C information exchange is the same as a direct exchange between A and C. The law must be capable of catching indirect routes to the same anti-competitive end."
— Arden LJ
"If retailer A discloses its pricing intentions to supplier B, knowing or foreseeing that B will pass them to retailer C, and C acts on them, a concerted practice arises."
— Arden LJ
후속 처리
The hub-and-spoke doctrine has been consistently applied by the CMA in subsequent cartel investigations.
Applied in the dairy retail pricing investigation (2011) where supermarkets exchanged pricing information through dairy processors.