The European Union’s high court on Thursday upheld a fine of EUR35.5m ($US43.5m) against General Motors’ Dutch subsidiary Opel Nederland for restricting cross border sales in the region.
According to The Associated Press, the European Court of Justice rejected an appeal against the fine by the GM subsidiary, saying Opel was unable to show that a lower court “made errors of law in its judgment” in 2003 when it upheld the EU regulators’ decision.
Opel reportedly was fined by the European Commission in 2000 for forcing Dutch dealers to stop selling cars to customers from neighbouring countries where Opel cars cost more.
The fine was reduced on appeal in 2003 from EUR43m ($52.7m), but the company took the case to the EU’s Luxembourg-based high court seeking to have the ruling annulled.
AP noted that the case is part of a broader EU drive to open up the European auto market, where prices still vary widely from country to country. The EU’s executive body said the ruling underscored the rights of citizens to shop across borders to find cheaper cars.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalData“We welcome in particular the fact that the court confirmed that discriminatory pricing agreements for domestic sales and exports to the detriment of consumers in other member states are an illegal, restrictive business practice,” Jonathan Todd, the European Commission’s antitrust spokesman, told the news agency.
In a statement cited by The Associated Press, Opel said the decision marked the end of the 10-year case. “We respect the Courts judgment, but we regret the European Court of Justice didn’t annul all grounds of the infringement,” the company reportedly said.