The Bundeskartellamt has imposed fines totalling € 41.4 million against Westfalen AG, Münster, and Propan Rheingas GmbH & Co. KG, Brühl, on account of illegal cartel agreements. The companies are accused of having restrained competition in the market for tank and bottled gas by customer protection agreements and accompanying price agreements, at least from 1997 until a search in May 2005.

In December 2007 (cf. Bundeskartellamt press release of 19 December 2007) and February 2008 the Bundeskartellamt had already imposed fines totalling approximately € 209 million against nine liquefied gas suppliers and their CEOs on grounds of such agreements.

The companies concerned are active in the supply of private and commercial customers with liquefied gas in small tanks (up to 5.6 t) and bottled gas. The companies involved in the cartel agreement are liquefied gas suppliers organised in the German liquefied gas association (Deutscher Verband Flüssiggas e.V., DVFG).

An evaluation of the documents and files seized during the search in May 2005 (cf. Bundeskartellamt press release of 4 May 2005) has revealed that the leading liquefied gas suppliers organised in the DVFG had agreed, at least since 1997, not to poach customers from one another. Customers of rival companies were not allowed to be lured away by the staff of other suppliers. Customers wishing to switch supplier were either not quoted a price, or if at all, an excessive “deterrent price”. The cartel agreement in the tank gas business was secured by a notification system: Information was exchanged reciprocally about enquiries from customers and compensation was mutually offered in the event of a change of supplier. These customer protection agreements, together with the accompanying price agreements, led to a price level at the companies involved (who account for more than two-thirds of the German market) that was far above the price level of smaller, so-called "independent” suppliers.

As the violations occurred before the new guidelines on the setting of fines based on turnover came into effect, the Bundeskartellamt has calculated the fines based on the old system of determining the additional proceeds achieved from the agreement. In doing so the Bundeskartellamt has taken account of the economic efficiency of the companies concerned as a mitigating factor; however, it points out that without exception the parent companies behind the companies involved are financially strong and in a position to pay the fines, thus securing the companies’ market positions in Germany.

The order imposing a fine against one of the companies and its responsible CEO is final. Appeals have been lodged, or can still be lodged, against the remaining orders imposing the fines; the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court will decide on the appeals.