Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 8 Hungary

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nagy Csongor István
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Collective Redress ◽  
Right Of Return ◽  
System P

This chapter examines the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Hungary. It begins with an overview of the transposition procedure, focusing on the Hungarian private enforcement landscape and the transposition process. In particular, it considers how the provisions implementing the Directive were built into the Hungarian Competition Act (HCA), creating a special regime that departs in certain aspects from the general principles of Hungarian civil law and civil procedure (e.g., access rules, calculation of damages). The chapter goes on to discuss the scope of the Hungarian implementing provisions as well as specific issues that arose during the transposition, including those relating to time-barring deadlines, binding force of decisions of other Member States, parent company liability, presumption and quantification of damages by cartels or other antitrust infringements, distribution of liability between co-infringers and right of return between co-infringers, access rules, collective redress, and organization of the judicial system.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 4 Cyprus

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannidou Maria
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Member State ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position

This chapter examines how the Antitrust Damages Directive has been transposed in Cyprus. It begins with a discussion of the transposition procedure, focusing on the Cypriot competition regime as well as the state of private enforcement in Cyprus. In particular, it provides an overview of the law currently in force against anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominant position, the Protection of Competition Law of 2008 (13(I)/2008), as amended in 2014 (Law 41(I)/2014) (Cypriot Competition Act), and the provisions relevant to private competition law enforcement. The chapter then considers the history and the different steps of the transposition process before describing the scope of the transposition measure. It also analyses the different provisions of the Cypriot Damages Act and issues that arose during the transposition, such as parent company liability, the binding force of decisions of competition authorities of other Member States, and presumption and quantification of damage caused by cartels or other antitrust infringements.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 15 Portugal

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferro Miguel Sousa
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Member States ◽  
Joint Liability ◽  
General Overview ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Opt Out

This chapter analyzes the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Portugal. It first provides a general overview of the transposition procedure, focusing on the unified Bill that was adopted by the Plenary of the Parliament on 20 April 2018 and configured as the Transposition Act. It then describes the scope of private enforcement of competition law in Portugal before considering specific issues that arose from the transposition of the Directive, such as those relating to rights to pre-trial discovery, partial centralization of private enforcement at the specialized Court, access to evidence, time-barring deadlines, protecting failed settlement talks, the binding force of public enforcement decisions, concepts of undertaking and parent company liability, the presumed proportion of responsibility for joint liability, the quantification of damages, the Portuguese opt-out regime (actio popularis), and the effect on trade between Member States.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of Civil Procedure in Common Law and Civil Law Systems

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Nader Ghanbari ◽  
Hassan Mohseni ◽  
Dawood Nassiran
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Specific Method ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Separate Branch ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Comparative Study

Comparing the legal systems is a specific method in which due to its important function is considered as a separate branch in law. None of the branches in law can place its knowledge merely on ideas and findings within the national borders. Several basic objections have been given regarding the definition and purpose of comparative study in civil procedure. In addition there are specific problems regarding studying practically the similar systems in a legal system like differences in purpose, definition and concept. In different legal systems like civil law and common law systems in which there is a divergence, even the judicial system`s organs and judges` appointment and judicial formalism are different, which add to the problems of the comparative study. Reviewing these differences could lead to a better understanding of these legal systems and recognizing the common principles in making use of each other`s findings considering these differences and indicate the obstacles of comparative study in this regard.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 3 Belgium

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cauffman Caroline
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
Economic Law ◽  
Collective Redress ◽  
Access To Documents

This chapter examines the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Belgium. It first considers the transposition procedure, noting Belgium’s Act of 6 June 2017 inserting a Title 3 ‘The action for damages for infringements of competition law’ into Book XVII of the Code of Economic Law, and the role of the Belgian Competition Authority. It then provides an overview of the substantive and temporal scope of the new rules of Book XVII, Title 3 of the Code of Economic Law before discussing terminological differences between the Directive and its transposition. It also explains how the transposition of the Directive facilitates access to documents, and goes on to analyse the effect of decisions of competition authorities, time-barring deadlines, solidary liability, passing-on of overcharges, presumption and quantification of damage by cartels or other antitrust infringements, consensual dispute resolution, collective redress for infringements of competition law, and parent company liability.

LIMITACIONES Y PRINCIPALES RETOS DE LA ORALIDAD CIVIL EN EL SISTEMA JUDICIAL PERUANO

SCIENTIARVM ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6
Author(s):  
GELBER RAMIREZ CUEVA ◽  
◽  
GERALDINE CHAVEZ SALINAS ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Key Words ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
El Sistema

ABSTRACT: The article presented contains an analysis of the main challenges that the implementation of the Civil Oral Litigation model in the Peruvian Judicial System represents, through the identification of recurrent challenges previously identified through the 1993 Civil Procedure Code, as well as the description of some possible limitations of the Peruvian Judicial System; to conclude with recommendations and practical actions to be taken by magistrates, lawyers and law students, as well as politicians, legislators and academics in the area. Key words: Oral litigation, Civil Law, civil reform.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 13 The Netherlands

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kortmann Jeroen ◽  
Mineur Simon
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Member State ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
General Overview ◽  
Joint And Several Liability ◽  
Collective Redress ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Limitation Periods ◽  
Parent Companies

This chapter focuses on the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in the Netherlands. It first provides a general overview of the transposition procedure, taking into account the Dutch private enforcement context. In particular, it examines how the Directive was transposed into Dutch law, beginning with the Proposal of Law and culminating in the ‘Implementation Act’ that entered into force on 10 February 2017. The chapter goes on to discuss the structural choices made by the Dutch legislature in implementing the Directive's provisions, paying special attention to the scope of the Dutch transposition of the Directive, before analysing specific issues that arose during the transposition, including those relating to the ‘no exemption’ provision for Dutch farmers, limitation periods, effects of National Competition Authorities' final infringement decisions, disclosure and protection of documents, evidentiary presumptions on damage and passing-on, joint and several liability, liability of parent companies, and collective redress.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 6 Germany

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kersting Christian
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
German Law ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Member States ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Joint And Several Liability

This chapter focuses on the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Germany. It first provides an overview of the transposition procedure, focusing on the role of the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy in drafting the legislation to transpose directive 2014/104/EU into German law. It then considers the scope of the German regime regarding cartel damages and how it was incorporated into the German Act against Restraints of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen, GWB) for exclusive application to competition law infringements. It also examines specific issues that arose during the transposition, including those relating to the directive’s definitions, the binding force of decisions of other Member States, parent company liability for fines, group liability for damages, the presumption and quantification of damages, joint and several liability and recovery of contribution from co-infringers, the liability of immunity recipients, the liability of small and medium-sized enterprises, disclosure of evidence, and settlements.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 7 Greece

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannidou Maria
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Member State ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Plenary Session ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Joint And Several Liability ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Collective Redress

This chapter focuses on the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Greece. It begins with a discussion of the transposition procedure, focusing on the Greek private competition law enforcement landscape. In particular, it considers the country’s Damages Act transposing the Damages Directive in the Greek legal order, adopted by Parliament (plenary session) on 14 March 2018, and the level of private competition litigation in Greece. The factors that partly explain the delay in the transposition of the Damages Directive by the Greek legislature are also examined. The chapter goes on to describe the substantive and temporal scope of the Damages Act as well as specific issues that arose during the transposition, including those relating to limitation periods, the binding force of decisions of other Member States, joint and several liability, parent company liability, presumption and quantification of damages by cartels, access to evidence, collective redress, and consensual dispute resolution.

ON INTERACTION OF MATERIAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW IN THE CONTEXT OF REFORMING THE NOMENCLATURE OF SCIENTIFIC SPECIALTIES IN JURISPRUDENCE

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-231
Author(s):  
S.I. Suslova
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Dialectical Logic ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Depth Study ◽  
Civil Science ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
The Relationship

Introduction: the influence of the material branches of law on the content and development of procedural branches has long been substantiated in the legal literature. At the same time, civil law scholars, limited by the scope of the nomenclature of scientific specialties in legal sciences, do not have the opportunity to conduct dissertation research aimed at identifying the influence of procedural branches on the norms of substantive law. With regard to scientific research, the study of such an impact is currently permissible only within the specialty 12.00.15. Reforming the nomenclature of scientific specialties towards its enlargement creates the basis for the development of the scientific theory of intersectoral relations, developed by M.Iu. Chelyshev. An in-depth study of the intersectoral interaction of civil law and civil procedure will contribute not only to the development of scientific knowledge, but also will allow solving practical problems at a different methodological level. Purpose: to analyze the stages of the formation of scientific specialties in the context of the relationship between civil law and procedure, to identify the advantages and disadvantages of uniting and dividing civil law and procedure in scientific research, to analyze dissertations in different periods of development of the science of civil law and the science of civil procedure, to formulate ways to improve directions of research to bridge the gap between the science of civil law and procedure. Methods: empirical methods of description, interpretation; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic. The legal-dogmatic private scientific method was used. Results: identified the main views on the ratio of material and procedural branches in legal science; it is illustrated that the intersectoral approach is currently admissible only for dissertations in the specialty 12.00.15, which led to an almost complete absence of scientific research on this topic in civil science; substantiated the need to establish the bilateral nature of the relationship and interaction of material and procedural block. Conclusions: reforming the nomenclature of scientific specialties by right in the direction of their enlargement should have a positive effect on bridging the gap that has developed between works on civil law and civil law procedure in the last years of their separate existence. This is especially true of civil science, which developed its own scientific theories in isolation from the possibilities of their implementation within the framework of procedural law. The methodological basis for solving these problems has already been formed – this is an intersectoral method, the application of which is justified and demonstrated in the works of M.Iu. Chelyshev.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document