Could congestion surcharge breach competition laws?

The Citrus Growers’ Association (CGA) will lodge a complaint with the Competition Commission over collusion between eight shipping lines that simultaneously imposed a congestion surcharge on citrus shippers. “The fact that all eight lines sent out the same letter (demanding the surcharge) on the same day suggests collusion,” CGA CEO Justin Chadwick told FTW. As far as the lines are concerned we are an easy target, said Chadwick. “The lines are seeking to recoup losses suffered during the Transnet strike. “They can’t impose a fine on Transnet so they put a levy on those they can – not because they should but because they can. They gave us a long story – ships are in the wrong positions, they have to steam faster – nothing to do with cargo and all related to the Transnet strike.” The lines’ apparent arrogance is particularly irksome, Chadwick feels. “They didn’t bother to engage cargo owners before (imposing the fine) and their attitude afterward, well, one told me about paying the levy, ‘You have no choice.’ “We should be putting our energies into trying to sort out the mess at Transnet instead of fighting each other. Instead, we have to put our energies into sorting this out. But this will continue until someone takes a stand,” Chadwick said. The CGA acknowledges that shippers are faced with the choice of paying the congestion surcharge on their invoices or else their containers will languish dockside unshipped. But the association is advising its members to include a statement while making payment reading: “We do no accept liability for this cost. Paid under protest, without prejudice to our rights.” “If the surcharge is found to be illegal, or imposed in contravention of the Competition Act, then a claim can be put forward to reclaim these amounts,” Chadwick said.