Ineos v Huntsman Petrochemicals [2006] EWHC 1241 (Ch)

Judgment (about 60 pages) by Mr Justice Blackburne sitting in the Chancery Division of the High Court in a dispute between Ineos and Huntsman Petrochemical, its ethylene supplier in Teesside, about the construction of contracts for the supply of ethylene and the use of ethylene pipelines. Ineos had advanced some competition law points in an attempt at invalidating aspects of the contract. Using the "clear and compelling evidence" standard (which according to Standards of evidence for competition complaints | viewpoint: Franck was inappropriate in this case), the judge found that the allegations of exploitative ethylene prices in breach of Article 82, exclusionary abuse through excessive charges for use of the ethylene delivery infrastructure, and a foreclosure effect of exclusivity clauses in breach of Article 81, had not been substantiated by Ineos. The judge also commented on the need to establish an effect on trade even under the Competition Act 1998, and on the interactions between concurrent OFT and court proceedings.

Filed under Article 81, Article 82, UK courts.

Reckon LLP is an economics consultancy with expertise in data analysis, economic regulation and competition law.

About Reckon