The Competition Tribunal dismissed a lawsuit by Transportes Delfos Ltda. (“Delfos”) against SCL Terminal Aéreo de Santiago S.A. (“SCL”), Sociedad Administradora de Estacionamientos Maxximiza S.A. (“Maxximiza”) –sub concessionaire of Vía Controlada– and Agencias Universales S.A. (“Agunsa”) –controller of SCL– since it was concluded that Delfos’ accusations regarding the market for passengers’ transport from the International Airport Arturo Merino Benítez de Santiago (the “Airport”) were not proved.
Delfos accused SCL and Maxximiza of infringing article 3 of the Decree Law N° 211 by having coordinated to abuse SCL’s dominant position in the aforesaid relevant market. First, it accused both companies of establishing facilitators in the restricted zone of the Airport in order to call and divert the demand from minibuses to other means of transport and of having eliminated the minibuses’ parking in order for Maxximiza to used them, therefore discriminating Delfos.
Through an extension of its lawsuit, Delfos accused Agunsa of preparing and executing, through its controller SCL, conducts that had the purpose of damaging Delfos. It also accused SCL of having discriminated it in the minibuses sub concession agreement by granting an additional counter to a competitor of Delfos.
The Tribunal, after it analysed the evidence presented by the parties, concluded that (i) Vía Controlada was not implemented on the date the lawsuit was filed; (ii) the minibuses parking was not eliminated, so no discrimination among minibuses companies and other means of transport in the relevant market was proved; (iii) there is no evidence that SCL had arbitrarily discriminated Delfos when granting an additional counter to a competitor; and (iv) there is no evidence that Agunsa had prepared, programmed and executed a policy in order for SCL to infringe the rules in a constant and consistent manner.
Due to the above, the Tribunal dismissed the lawsuit filed by Delfos, with costs.