A PYMNTS Company

Enbridge Wins Legal Battle Against Ducere’s Antitrust Allegations

By  |  January 15, 2025
Canada, AML, FINTRAC, AI

In a legal victory for Enbridge, a federal judge has dismissed an antitrust lawsuit filed by Ducere LLC, which accused the Canadian energy giant of stifling competition in crude oil transportation services in the Chicago area. The ruling marks a major setback for Ducere, which had sought to challenge Enbridge’s dominant position in the region’s oil infrastructure market.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    Subscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    U.S. District Judge April M. Perry ruled on Monday that Ducere failed to substantiate claims that Enbridge acted to maintain a monopoly by blocking access to vital pipelines. Ducere had alleged that Enbridge, along with ExxonMobil and Mustang Pipe Line LLC, engaged in anti-competitive practices to thwart a project aimed at transporting Canadian crude oil via barges from the Chicago area to southern refineries. According to Reuters, the lawsuit claimed that this alleged collusion effectively preserved Enbridge’s control over crude oil transportation to the southern Midwest and Gulf Coast.

    We’d love to be your preferred source for news.

    Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!

    Add as Preferred Source

    The dispute stemmed from Ducere’s proposed construction of a crude oil terminal along a canal in the Chicago region. The terminal was intended to connect with Mustang’s pipeline system, providing a route for Canadian crude to be shipped south by barge. Per Reuters, Ducere invested $11 million in the project, but it was ultimately scrapped when Mustang withdrew from the agreement. Ducere alleged that Mustang’s sudden withdrawal was influenced by Enbridge’s actions, accusing the company of sabotaging the project to protect its market dominance.

    However, Judge Perry found that Ducere did not present sufficient evidence to prove Enbridge engaged in monopolistic behavior. The court’s decision effectively absolves Enbridge of the claims that it deliberately sought to block competition in the crude oil transportation sector.

    The ruling is a relief for Enbridge, which has faced increased scrutiny over its control of key oil pipelines in North America. According to Reuters, the company argued that it had no involvement in Mustang’s decision to terminate its deal with Ducere, asserting that the project’s failure was not due to any anti-competitive conduct on its part.

    Source: USA Herald