A federal judge in Canada has reserved judgment on a CAD 5.25 million (USD 3.8 million, EUR 3.6 million) settlement in a price-fixing lawsuit against Norway’s biggest salmon farmers.
Cermaq, Grieg, Lerøy, Mowi, Nova Sea, and SalMar were sued in March 2020, with plaintiffs Irene Breckon and Gregory Sills claiming the companies engaged in a conspiracy to fix the prices of farmed Norwegian salmon sold in Canada from April 2013 and February 2019, in violation of the country’s Competition Act.
A settlement proposal in the case was reached on 22 September 2023, covering all Canadian consumers who purchased Norwegian farmed salmon during the period in question. The settlement calls for CAD 2.45 million (USD 1.8 million, EUR 1.6 million) to be distributed to eligible entities – companies that spent at least CAD 1 million (USD 737,000, EUR 677,000) on Norwegian farmed salmon between 2013 and 2019 – in addition to a CAD 250,000 (USD 184,000, EUR 169,000) donation to Food Banks Canada, and a CAD 1.5 million (USD 1.1 million, EUR 1 million) payment to the law firms representing the plaintiffs. As part of the settlement, the salmon firms would not admit any liability or wrongdoing.
Canadian Supreme Court Justice Clément Gascon certified the class action on behalf of the settlement class on 6 September 2023, and was scheduled to deliver a judgment on the settlement on 30 November, but he reserved judgment until further notice, according to Siskinds Partner Linda Visser.
Visser told SeafoodSource if the proposed settlement is approved, it will resolve all civil claims related to allegations of price-fixing against Norway’s salmon farming industry, after two similar cases were rolled into the Breckon and Sills case.
“Siskinds is satisfied with the settlement and consider it to be fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of the class – particularly when viewed in the context of the litigation risks and the time and expense required to pursue the case through to trial and any appeals,” Visser said. “Class counsel believe that the case has considerable merits, but cannot say with certainty what the outcome of the trial would have been.”
Visser cited a number of issues that factored into the settlement, including the U.S. Department of Justice discontinuing its investigation in January 2023, and the fact that nearly five years have passed since the European Commission commenced its investigation into the issue.
“To our knowledge, no findings have been issued [by the E.C.],” Visser said. “Even if findings are issued, there is no guarantee that the underlying conduction would be actionable in Canada. The law in Europe differs from that of Canada in terms of proving an unlawful price-fixing conspiracy.”
Canadian law has “developed in an unfavorable way” in terms of allowing cases such as the price-fixing lawsuit to obtain class-action status, Visser said. And the case hinged not just on whether the plaintiffs could prove a conspiracy, but also whether prices in Canada were impacted.
“The parties’ certification experts disagreed on this point,” Visser said.
Moreover, the time and expense required to see the case through a trial and verdict was a limiting factor in the pursuit of a trial and helped shape the settlement amount, Visser said.
“It would likely take at least several years to pursue the case through trial and we might not have a better result,” she said.
Visser said the compensation amount payable to individual companies that qualify for remuneration under the settlement "cannot be reliably estimated at this time because this will depend on the number and value of claims filed," but that notices will be sent to over 1,000 companies that may qualify for settlement funds.
Similar price-fixing lawsuits brought against the Norwegian salmon companies named in the Canadian lawsuit were settled in the United States in 2022.
In October 2022, a USD 33 million (EUR 31 million) settlement agreement was reached between the “indirect purchaser” class of plaintiffs and the Norwegian salmon firms. That followed an 85 million (EUR 79.7 million) settlement with U.S. direct-purchaser plaintiffs in May 2022.
Photo courtesy of mynewturtle/Shutterstock
