The recent rulings by the competition authority ACM regarding a complaint by dairy farmers against Lactalis and by the Disputes Committee for Unfair Commercial Practices regarding a matter between a supplier and Vreugdenhil Dairy Foods raise questions about the independence of the arbitrators, especially the latter.
This was reported by law firm Houthoff in a recent news update about the Unfair Commercial Practices Act. The ruling of the OHP Disputes Committee on Vreugdenhil and the decision of the ACM regarding Lactalis (both of which must make their milk prices more transparent and fairer) show many similarities, the law firm notes. "Some passages from the ruling (of the OHP committee) appear to have been taken from the decision. Furthermore, the ruling of the Disputes Committee was published only a few days after the decision regarding Lactalis. It is unclear whether this is the result of consultation and/or coordination with the ACM. If this were the case, this raises the question of how such coordination relates to the independent position of the Disputes Committee."
Lactalis has indicated that it will appeal the ACM ruling. Vreugdenhil has not yet done so, but according to Houthoff it could also go to the civil court. The ruling of the Disputes Committee is not yet binding advice, but only becomes so if the dispute is not submitted to the court within three months after publication of the ruling.
If Vreugdenhil does not comply with the ruling, the supplier has the option to enforce compliance with the binding advice through the court. If Vreugdenhil does submit the dispute to the court within three months, compliance cannot be demanded for the duration of the dispute, the agency states.