FENADISMER ADVISES FOR THE DEMANDS AGAINST DE CARTEL
Fenadismer has not hesitated to recommend “absolute prudence” in relation to the judicial outcome of the first claims against the cartel of truck manufacturers that are being processed in Spain. And it says that: “excessive public relevance has been given to a favorable judgment issued by a Court of First Instance in Murcia, ignoring that judgments have also been issued rejecting other claims filed.” They warn that: “with will take a long judicial battle foreseeably until the Supreme Court, for what the manufacturers of trucks have hired legal offices and economists of first level”.
Fenadismer does not hide its concern about the judgment issued by a Court of First Instance of Murcia because this ruling can create a mirage for the thousands of carriers that have decided to present their legitimate claim against the participating manufacturers of the cartel. “It should be clear that the ‘famous’ judgment of the Court of First Instance of Murcia is not the first ruling that has been issued in Spain, but have been issued several judgments by different courts of first instance with a result unfavorable to the interests of the claimants, in most cases because the expert report that accompanies the claim, and that determines the amount of damage to claim, is not sufficiently motivated, so it has been rejected by the courts.
In fact, in a judgment issued by the Commercial Court No. 1 of Zaragoza on December 13, the judge fully accepts the arguments of the experts hired by the defendant manufacturers, which dismantle the method of calculation of the damage established by the plaintiff in his expert report, based exclusively on the establishment of a percentage on a historical average of previous cartels in other sectors, but without setting a precise econometric criterion on the calculation of the damage actually caused to the claimant, for which he dismisses the claim filed.
At this point, Fenadismer insists on warning the carriers that they are going to complain against the manufacturers so that they are cautious and “do not be fooled” about the possible legal offers that can be found in the market not specialized in this type of claims, taking in account that its final resolution will lead to a long judicial battle that will foreseeably reach the Supreme Court, which makes it imperative that the demands and expert reports accompanying them are technically well founded, to avoid possible dismissals and the resulting condemnation in costs to the complaining party.