The wave of lawsuits against the so-called truck cartel continues. Truck Reclaim, a cooperation partner of the German Federal Association for Freight Transport, Logistics and Disposal (BGL), filed two new collective actions against Swedish truck manufacturer Scania at the end of June. According to the BGL, this marks the launch of a third supported class action involving nearly 15,000 truck purchases made between 1997 and 2011. The third wave of lawsuits seeks damages totalling approximately €85 million, reports Deutsche Verkehrs-Zeitung (DVZ).
The BGL is supported by the industry associations AMÖ, BWVL and DSLV. Together, they aim to “create justice for member transport and logistics companies.”
ECJ confirms Scania’s involvement in the cartel – liability established
In a ruling issued in February 2024, the European Court of Justice confirmed that Scania was involved in the so-called truck cartel. The judges upheld an €880 million fine imposed by the European Commission. This ruling legally establishes that Scania – unlike other cartel members – is jointly and severally liable for the resulting damages, according to the BGL.
Third wave of lawsuits: A special case
Because Scania did not join the original settlement with the European Commission and instead contested the decision in court, the statute of limitations was suspended. This now allows thousands of companies to assert claims once more – including for vehicles from other manufacturers such as MAN, Daimler, Volvo/Renault, DAF and Iveco.
Settlements remain a possibility
It remains to be seen whether this round of litigation will also lead to settlements. However, individual agreements – such as the one reached by major fleet operator Waberer’s – show that manufacturers are open to settling.
Wider eligibility for compensation
A recent ruling by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has strengthened the ongoing collective claim against Scania. It confirms that not only purchasers but also lessees and hire-purchase customers are entitled to compensation – provided their contracts fall within the cartel period. This significantly broadens the circle of eligible claimants.
In addition, the BGH applies the so-called “principle of experience” to leasing contracts, stating that cartelised prices are, on average, higher than hypothetical market prices. This principle allows plaintiffs to claim damages without having to provide detailed price comparisons, thereby significantly easing the burden of proof in future proceedings.
