Litigation Financiers (LitFin), an investment fund specializing in complex litigation financing, is hosting a webinar on compensation claims related to the Belgian private security cartel. This event presents an excellent opportunity to acquire practical insights from a panel of experts.
LitFin is collaborating with deprevernet, a Belgian law firm, and Theseus Economics, an economic consultancy, to assist businesses in evaluating and recovering damages from the cartel members through a risk-free, no-win, no-fee model.
On 2 July 2024, the Belgian Competition Authority (BCA) determined that three security firms—Seris, G4S, and Securitas—engaged in cartel activities within the private security services sector from 2008 to 2020.
All companies involved admitted to their role in the infringement, which reduced the fines for G4S and Seris. However, the BCA still imposed significant fines: 36 million euros on G4S and 11 million euros on Seris.
Although Securitas was found equally culpable, it was not fined due to its status as the first to provide evidence of the illicit practices to the BCA. Additionally, 11 individuals received immunity from prosecution, while proceedings are still ongoing for one individual.
The BCA’s ruling pertains to various private security services, including manned guarding services, which encompass the provision of uniformed on-site guards; alarm monitoring and response services; electronic guarding services (such as alarm installation and maintenance); and aviation security services.
The parties involved acknowledged their engagement in three distinct yet interconnected unlawful practices:
Minimum hourly wages for security personnel. Based on a cost index framework, the three firms implemented minimum hourly wages for security personnel. This framework was developed under the auspices of the “Beroepsvereniging van Bewakingsondernemingen” (the “Professional Association of Surveillance Companies”), to which all three companies were affiliated.
Collaboration in public procurement and other agreements. The parties shared information regarding their intentions to participate in tenders and the pricing strategies they would adopt for such tenders. For instance, they agreed to honour each other’s existing positions on specific contracts; they committed to not bidding below a predetermined price threshold; they designated which contracts would be awarded to which competitor; they communicated their disinterest in certain contracts; they exchanged and coordinated detailed hourly pricing information; and they established price ranges for particular contracts.
No-poaching agreements. The parties consented to refrain from soliciting each other’s employees. During settlement negotiations with the BCA, G4S revealed that the security firms indeed enforced a prohibition on active recruitment among themselves.
Companies that acquired security services from any of these firms during the cartel period are entitled to seek compensation from the cartel members for any losses they have suffered. If your organization engaged private security services during this timeframe, it is possible that you have overpaid and may qualify for compensation.
The webinar, scheduled for 12 March 2025, will present insights from Jasper De fauw, Partner at deprevernet, a prominent competition law expert; Juraj Siska, Partner at LitFin, who serves as the director of the France & Benelux office; and Máté Fodor, Partner at Theseus Economics, a well-regarded competition economist known for his work on complex competition issues.
