The Broad Axe Falls ' Granville v. LG

• Published date: 26 March 2024
• Law Firm: Arnold & Porter
• Author: Alastair Brown

One of the very few UK cartel damages judgments was recently handed down in Granville Technology Group Limited and Others v. LG Display Co. Ltd. and Others [2024] EWHC 13 (Comm) (Granville v. LG). The judgment demonstrates the UK courts' evolving approach to deciding follow-on damages claims, particularly with regard to the consideration of overcharge and downstream pass-on:

1. Overcharge: The English courts continue to use the "broad axe" principle when assessing overcharge. This approach allows the court to adopt an element of estimation and assumption in calculating damages in order to avoid an unreasonable insistence on precision to defeat a justified claim for compensation. This is a pragmatic approach to damages given the inherent evidential limitations often seen in follow-on damages claims.

A similar approach by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the CAT) was recently upheld by the Court of Appeal in Royal Mail/BT.¹ In its February 27, 2024 judgment, the Court of Appeal dismissed all of the unsuccessful defendant's grounds of appeal, noting that "criticism of this approach [namely wielding the broad axe on issues of overcharge] was unjustified" as the "CAT did not simply split the difference" but "made positive and reasoned findings as to the appropriate quantification of the overcharge" by applying the broad-axe principle in "precisely the sort of situation where wielding the broad axe is appropriate."²

2. Demonstrating Pass-on: A lack of documentary evidence is not fatal to...