50 lines
2.5 KiB
YAML
50 lines
2.5 KiB
YAML
plaintiff:
|
|
- Competition Commission
|
|
defendant:
|
|
- QUANTR LIMITED
|
|
- CHEUNG MAN KIT
|
|
jurisdiction_code: HKCT
|
|
jurisdiction_name: Competition Tribunal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
|
|
case_location:
|
|
- 香港特別行政區
|
|
- Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
|
|
case_reason: >-
|
|
Competition Commission claims a pecuniary penalty from the 1st Respondent for contravening the First
|
|
Conduct Rule under section 6 of the Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), with the 2nd Respondent being
|
|
case_object:
|
|
- pecuniary penalty
|
|
judgment_result:
|
|
- charge: 1st Respondent's involvement in an agreement or concerted practice (liability issue)
|
|
result: Allowed. The court found that the 1st Respondent engaged in price-fixing with B Co, as evidenced
|
|
by lowering its quotation for Item (2) based on information exchanged.
|
|
- charge: 2nd Respondent's involvement in an agreement or concerted practice (liability issue)
|
|
result: Allowed. The court found that the 2nd Respondent was involved in the price-fixing agreement
|
|
with B Co, as he initiated and acted upon the information exchange.
|
|
- charge: Calculation of pecuniary penalty for the 1st Respondent (quantum issue)
|
|
result: Allowed. The court agreed to impose a pecuniary penalty of HK$37,702.26 on the 1st Respondent
|
|
based on the financial information and methodology provided.
|
|
judgment_summary: >-
|
|
In CTEA1/2020, the Competition Commission alleged Quantr Limited (Quantr) and Cheung Man Kit contravened
|
|
the First Conduct Rule under section 6 of the Competition Ordinance. The court found Quantr engaged
|
|
in price-fixing with B Co, and Cheung initiated information exchange leading to price-fixing. A HK$37,702.26
|
|
pecuniary penalty was imposed on Quantr.
|
|
involved_entities:
|
|
- entity_name: Hon Linda Chan J
|
|
reason: Presiding judge in this case, responsible for fact-finding and adjudication.
|
|
- entity_name: Competition Commission
|
|
reason: Applicant in the case.
|
|
- entity_name: Quantr Limited
|
|
reason: 1st Respondent in the case.
|
|
- entity_name: Cheung Man Kit
|
|
reason: 2nd Respondent in the case.
|
|
- entity_name: MinterEllison LLP
|
|
reason: Solicitors for the applicant.
|
|
- entity_name: Humphrey & Associates
|
|
reason: Solicitors for the 1st and 2nd respondents.
|
|
- entity_name: Competition Tribunal
|
|
reason: The tribunal that made the judgment.
|
|
- entity_name: Carecraft Construction Co Ltd
|
|
reason: Case cited in paragraph 13, articulated summary procedure principles.
|
|
- entity_name: Re Carecraft Construction Co Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 172
|
|
reason: Case cited in paragraph 13, articulated summary procedure principles.
|