Germany · 2005 (settled 2019)
CDC’s action before the Düsseldorf court was the first large-scale antitrust damages claim ever brought in Europe. After fourteen years of litigation for more than 35 cement buyers, it ended in a confidential settlement.
The cement case holds a special place in CDC’s history: the action filed in August 2005 before the Regional Court of Düsseldorf was the first large-scale antitrust damages action ever brought in Europe. It marked the beginning of a private enforcement culture on the continent and demonstrated that cartel victims could and would fight for the compensation they were owed, even when the legal path was uncertain, complex, and long.
The underlying infringement had been established by Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (FCO) in 2003, when it imposed fines totalling €702 million on twelve companies, later reduced to €330 million on appeal, for illegal quota and market-sharing agreements that had operated across Germany since at least the early 1990s. The six largest German cement producers accounted for the vast majority of the fines. Both the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf and the German Federal Court of Justice confirmed the existence of the cartels.
CDC brought two separate actions on behalf of more than 35 corporate customers of the German cement producers. The first action was ultimately dismissed on appeal in 2015 on the grounds that the claim assignments to CDC were invalid, a decision CDC disputed vigorously and at significant financial cost, having paid over €3.5 million in adverse cost reimbursements. Undeterred, CDC filed a second action in 2015 before the Regional Court of Mannheim, this time taking additional precautionary steps to secure adverse legal costs. Though initially dismissed as time-barred, the case was transformed by a landmark Federal Court of Justice judgment in June 2018, which provided long-awaited legal certainty on limitation periods in antitrust damages cases and overruled the interpretation that had led to the Mannheim dismissal.
Together with renowned external experts, CDC has carried out a comprehensive economic assessment of the damage caused by the cartel. In doing so, the specific characteristics of the sugar market, such as the EU Sugar Regulation, were taken into account. Given that the cartel had an impact on several market levels, the assessment comprises a combined horizontal and vertical economic damage analysis.
Accordingly, both direct and indirect customers of the sugar manufacturers were significantly overcharged for their purchases of industrial sugar, household sugar and substitute products during the cartel period – and beyond, due to after-effects. By the end of 2025, the total damages claimed by CDC, including interest, amount to over €369 million.
In 2019, after fourteen years of proceedings, the parties reached a confidential out-of-court settlement. The case stands as a defining example of CDC’s resilience and long-term commitment to achieving justice for harmed companies, whatever the obstacles.
The proceedings are currently at the stage of taking evidence regarding the damages to be awarded. The Higher Regional Court has appointed an economic expert for this purpose. CDC, for its part, is being supported by the economic experts at Solve.
In fact, other claimants have also filed numerous claims for damages due to the sugar cartel before various German courts; in some cases, the sugar manufacturers have even already been ordered to pay damages, albeit only small amounts. The CDC case could become the first – and by far the most significant – case in which an appeal court awards substantial damages in relation to that cartel.
Netherlands · 2011 (settled 2017)
CDC sued ExxonMobil, Shell, Total and Sasol in The Hague for over €100 million on behalf of eight paraffin wax buyers, mainly candle producers. The case ended with settlements with all four defendants.
Paraffin wax is a widely used industrial material, with applications ranging from candle production to packaging, cosmetics, construction, and food processing. Between at least 1992 and 2005, the market for paraffin wax across Europe was the subject of one of the most extensive cartels ever sanctioned by the European Commission. In more than 50 meetings and through hundreds of written communications, major oil and chemical companies, including ExxonMobil, Shell, Total, Sasol, ENI, Repsol, MOL, and RWE, coordinated prices, allocated customers and market shares, and agreed on minimum prices and price increases. The Commission imposed fines of more than €676 million in 2008.
The underlying infringement had been established by Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (FCO) in 2003, when it imposed fines totalling €702 million on twelve companies, later reduced to €330 million on appeal, for illegal quota and market-sharing agreements that had operated across Germany since at least the early 1990s. The six largest German cement producers accounted for the vast majority of the fines. Both the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf and the German Federal Court of Justice confirmed the existence of the cartels.
CDC acquired damage claims from eight purchasers of paraffin wax, primarily candle producers with production sites across five European countries, and filed an action for damages in September 2011 before the court in The Hague, Netherlands, against ExxonMobil, Shell, Total, and Sasol. Detailed transaction data, confirmed by external economic experts, demonstrated significant price overcharges throughout the cartel period. Total damages including interest claimed by CDC exceeded €100 million. In December 2014, The Hague Court confirmed its jurisdiction, the validity of the claim assignments, and the applicable laws.
Together with renowned external experts, CDC has carried out a comprehensive economic assessment of the damage caused by the cartel. In doing so, the specific characteristics of the sugar market, such as the EU Sugar Regulation, were taken into account. Given that the cartel had an impact on several market levels, the assessment comprises a combined horizontal and vertical economic damage analysis.
Accordingly, both direct and indirect customers of the sugar manufacturers were significantly overcharged for their purchases of industrial sugar, household sugar and substitute products during the cartel period – and beyond, due to after-effects. By the end of 2025, the total damages claimed by CDC, including interest, amount to over €369 million.
CDC subsequently reached out-of-court settlements with all four defendants, first with Sasol in 2015, followed by the remaining defendants in 2017, bringing the proceedings to a successful conclusion.
The proceedings are currently at the stage of taking evidence regarding the damages to be awarded. The Higher Regional Court has appointed an economic expert for this purpose. CDC, for its part, is being supported by the economic experts at Solve.
In fact, other claimants have also filed numerous claims for damages due to the sugar cartel before various German courts; in some cases, the sugar manufacturers have even already been ordered to pay damages, albeit only small amounts. The CDC case could become the first – and by far the most significant – case in which an appeal court awards substantial damages in relation to that cartel.
Germany and Finland · 2009 (settled 2020)
CDC’s first major action, for 32 pulp and paper companies, led to the landmark CJEU ruling CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C-352/13) on suing cartel members jointly. It was settled with every defendant.
The Hydrogen Peroxide case was CDC’s first major damages action and produced a series of landmark rulings that helped shape the landscape of private antitrust enforcement in Europe. Hydrogen peroxide is a bleaching agent used primarily in the pulp and paper industry, and the cartel, which ran across the entire EEA from at least 1994 to 2000, involved price-fixing, market and customer allocation, and the exchange of confidential commercial information. In 2006, the European Commission found that a number of major chemical companies, including Akzo Nobel, Solvay, Kemira, Evonik Degussa, Arkema, and FMC, had participated in the infringement.
The underlying infringement had been established by Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (FCO) in 2003, when it imposed fines totalling €702 million on twelve companies, later reduced to €330 million on appeal, for illegal quota and market-sharing agreements that had operated across Germany since at least the early 1990s. The six largest German cement producers accounted for the vast majority of the fines. Both the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf and the German Federal Court of Justice confirmed the existence of the cartels.
CDC launched damages actions in Germany in 2009 and in Finland in 2011. In Germany, CDC acquired claims from 32 pulp and paper companies across 13 European countries, representing almost half of total European demand for hydrogen peroxide. Economic analysis confirmed significant price overcharges during the cartel period and beyond, with total damages including interest estimated at well over €350 million. The German proceedings gave rise to the landmark CJEU judgment CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (Case C-352/13), which confirmed that all cartel members can be sued together at the seat of any one of them, and that standard jurisdiction clauses in supply contracts do not cover secret cartel damage claims, a ruling of lasting significance for antitrust litigation across Europe. CDC reached settlements with all defendants in the German proceedings, with the final settlement concluded in 2020.
Together with renowned external experts, CDC has carried out a comprehensive economic assessment of the damage caused by the cartel. In doing so, the specific characteristics of the sugar market, such as the EU Sugar Regulation, were taken into account. Given that the cartel had an impact on several market levels, the assessment comprises a combined horizontal and vertical economic damage analysis.
Accordingly, both direct and indirect customers of the sugar manufacturers were significantly overcharged for their purchases of industrial sugar, household sugar and substitute products during the cartel period – and beyond, due to after-effects. By the end of 2025, the total damages claimed by CDC, including interest, amount to over €369 million.
In Finland, CDC pursued Kemira Oyj on behalf of two Finnish pulp and paper companies. The Helsinki District Court rejected all of Kemira’s preliminary objections, confirming jurisdiction, the validity of the claim assignments, and that the claims were not time-barred. Damages including interest for which Kemira was held liable amounted to approximately €78 million. CDC reached an out-of-court settlement with Kemira in 2014.
In a parallel development, CDC successfully intervened before the EU courts to support the European Commission’s republication of a more detailed, non-confidential version of the Hydrogen Peroxide decision, a step that significantly aids victims in substantiating their damages claims and establishing causation.
Netherlands · 2011
CDC claimed over €100 million in Amsterdam for ten pulp and paper companies, representing almost half of European demand. The case was settled with all four defendants after a key 2020 ruling on limitation periods.
Sodium chlorate is a bleaching agent used primarily in the pulp and paper industry, and between 1994 and 2000 its market across Europe was the subject of a well-organised cartel. In 2008, the European Commission found that Akzo Nobel/EKA Chemicals, Kemira Chemicals, Arkema France, and Aragonesas had coordinated pricing, allocated customers and market shares, and exchanged commercially sensitive information across numerous meetings, all with the explicit aim of maximising their margins at customers’ expense. The Commission imposed fines exceeding €79 million.
The underlying infringement had been established by Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (FCO) in 2003, when it imposed fines totalling €702 million on twelve companies, later reduced to €330 million on appeal, for illegal quota and market-sharing agreements that had operated across Germany since at least the early 1990s. The six largest German cement producers accounted for the vast majority of the fines. Both the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf and the German Federal Court of Justice confirmed the existence of the cartels.
In May 2011, CDC filed a damages action before the District Court of Amsterdam on behalf of ten pulp and paper companies with 27 production sites across nine European countries, together representing almost half of total European demand for sodium chlorate. Economic analysis of detailed transaction data confirmed that the cartel resulted in substantial price overcharges, with total damages including interest claimed by CDC exceeding €100 million.
Together with renowned external experts, CDC has carried out a comprehensive economic assessment of the damage caused by the cartel. In doing so, the specific characteristics of the sugar market, such as the EU Sugar Regulation, were taken into account. Given that the cartel had an impact on several market levels, the assessment comprises a combined horizontal and vertical economic damage analysis.
Accordingly, both direct and indirect customers of the sugar manufacturers were significantly overcharged for their purchases of industrial sugar, household sugar and substitute products during the cartel period – and beyond, due to after-effects. By the end of 2025, the total damages claimed by CDC, including interest, amount to over €369 million.
The proceedings generated several important rulings on jurisdiction, the validity of claim assignments, and limitation periods. Notably, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal issued a landmark judgment in February 2020 confirming that CDC’s claims against Kemira Chemicals were not time-barred, a decision that provided meaningful additional legal certainty for private antitrust enforcement more broadly. CDC reached out-of-court settlements with Arkema France, Akzo Nobel, EKA Chemicals and Kemira during the course of the proceedings.
In a parallel development, CDC successfully intervened before the EU courts to support the European Commission’s republication of a more detailed, non-confidential version of the Hydrogen Peroxide decision, a step that significantly aids victims in substantiating their damages claims and establishing causation.
Tell us about your case and one of our experts will get back to you shortly.
Avenue Louise 475, B-1050 Brussels
+32 2 213 49 20
Woogstrasse 4, D-67659 Kaiserslautern
+49 631 303 79 0
17, rue Antoine Jans, L-1820
+352 26 95 30 87
