The European Commission yesterday fined plastics and heating group Quinn Barlo €9 million for its part in a cartel that illegally fixed the price of acrylic glass.
Three other companies were also fined for their role in the cartel, which dates back to the late 1990s, when executives met in a Dublin hotel to exchange sensitive data and fix prices.
The total fines imposed by the commission in the case are €344.56 million, the fourth highest ever imposed by the EU in a price fixing and cartel case.
The other companies affected in the case are: Arkema, which was spun off this month from the French oil firm Total; British chemicals company firm ICI, and British acrylics producer Lucite.
A fifth company involved in the acrylic glass cartel, Germany's Degussa, was spared a fine after it took advantage of the EU leniency programme created for firms that provide information about price fixing.
"These fines will serve as a cold shower for the management and shareholders of all these companies, who have to realise that cartels cannot and will not be tolerated," said competition commissioner Neelie Kroes in a statement announcing the fines.
Acrylic glass is widely used in cars, DVDs, lenses and household appliances. Quinn Barlo, which was formed when the Quinn Group completed a hostile takeover of Barlo in May 2004, said it intended to appeal the decision by the commission.
In a statement, the company said it had only become aware of the cartel investigation by the commission after it had paid €84 million for Barlo in May 2004. "The Quinn Group had no involvement whatsoever of the alleged infringement," it said.
The commission's investigation found that the five companies had agreed, fixed and monitored prices for acrylic glass, and exchanged commercially important and confidential information in the EU between 1997 and 2002.
It pinpointed a meeting in a Dublin hotel in October 1999 between the competing firms at which officials co-ordinated an increase in the European price level for types of acrylic glass widely used in the car industry for the production of tail lamps and glass for dashboards.
Handwritten notes obtained by the commission showed the participants agreed on a price increase for the acrylic glass as of January 2000, with an announcement of the increase in November for the European market, the commission said. Company executives also met in Germany in 2000 to plot another co-ordinated price rise.
The decision notes that any person affected by the anti-competitive behaviour may seek damages before national courts using elements of the decision as evidence. This may leave the firms cited open to further losses.
