In June 2001, the Competition Authority received an anonymous complaint alleging that heating oil companies across the west of Ireland were engaging in price fixing.  It was alleged that most of the distributors of heating oil in the Galway city and Galway county area had agreed to increase the margin on the price of kerosene and gas oil.

Following our investigation, the Director of Public Prosecutions, in April, May and June of 2004, preferred charges against 24 defendants. To date, there have been seventeen convictions involving ten undertakings and seven individuals. A nolle prosequi was entered in six cases.

A summary of all convictions is set out in the table below.

More information?

More detailed information about these cases can be found in our Annual Report 2005 and 2006.

Last Defendant

Pat Hegarty is the last remaining defendant in the heating oil investigation.

This case was up for hearing at Galway Circuit Criminal Court on 21st May 2008. Counsel for the accused moved a motion to quash the indictment on the basis that under the Competition (Amendment) Act 1996, the accused’s alleged guilt was contingent upon there being a finding that the company, of which the accused was a manager, had committed an offence which in turn required a conviction in existence recorded against that company. However no prosecution had been initiated against that company, Fate Park Limited, trading as Sweeney Oil/Rabbitt Oil, in respect of the alleged price-fixing agreement.

Counsel for the DPP resisted the defence application on the basis that a jury could convict the accused once it is satisfied that the company had committed the offence in question, and it was not necessary formally to convict the company in order to be so satisfied.

Mr. Justice Groarke agreed to the request made by the prosecution to state a case to the Supreme Court on this matter.

Having heard the arguments in the case, the Supreme Court issued its judgment in October 2011.  The Court found that an individual, such as a director, officer or manager of an undertaking, can be prosecuted even if the undertaking he was working for and which committed the offence under the Competition Act has not been prosecuted.  A copy of the Supreme Court decision can be found by clicking here.