scholarly journals Multilingualism in the EU and Consistency of Private Enforcement of Competition Law: Two Examples from CEE Countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-180
Author(s):  
Anna Piszcz
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Public Versus Private ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This paper attempts to address the question of how multilingualism in the EU might affect the consistency of private enforcement of competition law. In the literature, there have been concerns raised about the consistency of public enforcement of competition law, so in this paper attention has shifted to concerns about consistency of private enforcement. For the purposes of this paper, a distinction is drawn between rule-making and the application of competition law. The latter falls outside the scope of this paper. The article starts by going straight into aspects of public versus private enforcement of EU competition law and consistency of private enforcement of competition law. Next, by looking at examples of national rules implementing the EU Damages Directive, the author is going to discern what challenges for consistency of private enforcement of competition law are associated with the multilingualism in the EU.

Part I Introduction, 1 Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wijckmans Frank ◽  
Tuytschaever Filip
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Eu

This chapter explains the term ‘vertical agreements’ and what it covers. It addresses a number of general issues that are relevant to the EU competition law treatment of vertical agreements in general. It describes the implementation and the (public and private) enforcement of Article 101 TFEU before and after the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003. The chapter provides the historical background of both Regulation 330/2010 and Regulation 461/2010. In particular, it devotes specific attention to the nature and legal and practical consequences of soft EU competition law (in the form of notices, guidelines, etc) as opposed to hard EU competition law (provisions of primary and secondary EU law).

scholarly journals La aplicación privada del derecho de la competencia: acciones de daños y pronunciamientos judiciales = Private enforcement of competition law: damages actions and judicial pronouncements

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Fernando Díez Estella
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Property Insurance ◽  
The Eu

Resumen: Tras más de medio siglo de aplicación eminentemente pública del Derecho de la Com­petencia, estamos asistiendo a un impulso de la aplicación privada, que permite a los perjudicados por conductas anticompetitivas reclamar daños y perjuicios ante los tribunales civiles. Tanto la Directiva 2014/104/CE como su transposición en España por el RD Ley 9/2017 significan grandes avances en este ámbito. El objeto del presente trabajo es el análisis y valoración crítica de los primeros pronuncia­mientos judiciales que han tenido lugar resolviendo estas reclamaciones, derivadas principalmente de cárteles (azúcar, seguro decenal, sobres de papel). Se prestará especial atención a los informes periciales de valoración del daño, así como la diferente eficacia de las acciones follow-on y las stand-alone.Palabras clave: aplicación privada, acciones de daños, Directiva, estimación del daño, acciones stand-alone.Abstract: After more than half a century of public enforcement of Competition law in the EU, we gaze at the fostering of private enforcement, which allows filling damages actions to those who have suffered the economic harm due to anticompetitive practices. Both Directive 2014/104/CE and its implementation in Spain through RD Ley 9/2017 are significant steps in this direction. The aim of this paper is the critical analysis of the first judicial pronouncements dictated when dealing with such claims, basically provoked by cartels (such as sugar, property insurance or envelopes). We examine closely the relevance in these proceedings of the economic proof, as well as the different effectiveness of follow-on and stand-alone actions.Keywords: private enforcement, damages actions, Directive, harm estimation, stand-alone claims.

Rule of Law Values in the Decentralized Public Enforcement of EU Competition Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katalin J Cseres
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Governance Model ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
Consistent Application ◽  
The Eu

This chapter evaluates the functioning of the decentralized public enforcement of EU competition law. The analysis focuses on the effectiveness of the decentralized enforcement, which relies on Rule of Law principles. It has been argued that Rule of Law principles are a prerequisite for effective competition law enforcement. Aside from that, assessing the effectiveness of the decentralized enforcement framework also takes account of the problems of multilevel governance which have emerged as a result of the decentralization of enforcement powers and the creation of parallel competences for the Commission and national actors which made it essential to guarantee uniform and consistent application of the EU competition rules. Centrifugal pulls from the Member States towards their national legal systems and centripetal pushes from the Commission create uniformity and consistency in this multilevel system. Analysing these bottom-up and top-down approaches allows us to analyse decentralized enforcement as a specific governance model.

The Role of Private Enforcement within EU Competition Law

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 143-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niamh Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Hard Core ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
The Right

AbstractPrivate enforcement is an increasingly prominent element of EU competition law. The forthcoming Directive on damages actions aims to strengthen and, to a degree, harmonise procedures for private competition litigation, while recent case law of the Court of Justice reaffirms the centrality of the right to claim compensation for losses stemming from breach of the competition rules. Moreover, this right has been presented as an essentially unitary one, whereby any victim of any type of competition infringement has, in principle, the right to claim damages. This chapter reviews the evolving framework, and considers, specifically, the role for private enforcement within the overall system of EU competition law. Taking into account the Commission’s efforts to facilitate and increase private enforcement, the emerging EU public enforcement framework, as well as the substantive EU competition rules more generally, this chapter argues that, contrary to the rhetoric, private enforcement is a mechanism best adapted, and arguably most appropriate, for use only in the context of hard-core cartels. It is further suggested that the gap between rhetoric and reality is not problematic as such, yet difficulties may arise insofar as these divergences conflict with the principle of effectiveness.

Antitrust Damages in EU Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-151
Author(s):  
Albertina Albors-Llorens
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
New Era ◽  
Legal Instrument ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Eu

The adoption of Directive 2014/104/EU on actions for damages for infringements of the competition rules has marked the beginning of a new era in the field of the private enforcement of the EU competition rules. The arduous legislative journey leading to the adoption of the Directive, the specific aspects pertaining to the exercise of damages actions covered by it and its attempt to establish an effective coordination between the systems of public and private enforcement have already received intense attention by antitrust scholars. However, this contribution will focus on the study of the Directive’s significance as a novel legal instrument in both the fields of EU competition law and EU law in general.

Part I EU Competition Law Private Enforcement and the Antitrust Damages Directive, 1 Damages Actions in the Enforcement of EU Competition Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodger Barry ◽  
Ferro Miguel Sousa ◽  
Marcos Francisco
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Traditional Role ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter sets the context for the EU’s Antitrust Damages Directive of 2014 in order to understand its significance and potential impact. It first provides a historical background to EU competition law before discussing its public enforcement, focusing on the traditional role of the European Commission in enforcing the EU competition law rules. It then considers developments in EU law private enforcement, citing the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and European Commission in seeking to promote and facilitate private enforcement, particularly damages actions. It also examines the experience of damages actions in the EU, the issue of collective redress, the US antitrust private enforcement context and experience, and EU private international law rules and their significance for raising damages actions across the Member States’ courts. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the development of competition law damages actions under EU law.

scholarly journals Piecemeal Harmonisation Through the Damages Directive? Remarks on What Received Too Little Attention in Relation to Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 79-98
Author(s):  
Anna Piszcz
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Approach ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The Eu

On 11 June 2013, the European Commission adopted a package of measures to tackle the lack of an efficient and coherent private enforcement system of EU competition law in its Member States. In particular, a draft Damages Directive was proposed in order to meet the need for a sound European approach to private enforcement of EU competition law in damages actions. The Damages Directive was ultimately adopted on 26 November 2014. This paper explores some aspects of private antitrust enforcement which have not received sufficient attention from the EU decision-makers during the long preparatory and legislative works preceding the Directive. The paper discusses also some of the remedies that have not been harmonised, and shows how these ‘gaps’ in harmonisation may limit the Directive’s expected influence on both the thinking and practice of private antitrust enforcement in Europe. It is argued in conclusion that further harmonisation may be needed in order to actually transform private enforcement of EU competition law before national courts

Part III Comparative Analysis of the Transposition Processes and Outcomes, 21 Concluding Remarks

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodger Barry ◽  
Ferro Miguel Sousa ◽  
Marcos Francisco
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Legal Provision ◽  
Joint And Several Liability ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Collective Redress ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter reflects on how the book has examined the implementation of the EU's Antitrust Damages Directive across a selected number of key Member States and how its transposition has impacted on one particular aspect of the EU competition law enforcement framework: private enforcement through competition damages claims. It has discussed the national transposition processes, debates, and final measures introduced and implemented, and how best to incorporate the Directive within the pre-existing national legal provision, as well as considering some of the key problems in implementing the Directive. A number of unresolved and complicated issues have been identified, such as those relating to the practical application of the rules on the presumption of harm, passing-on and quantification of damages, how to determine liability within groups of companies, how to apportion joint and several liability between co-infringers, and consumer/collective redress in the competition law context.

scholarly journals Reshaping Liability – The Concept of Undertaking Applied to Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedikt Freund
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Minor Importance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Recent Developments

Abstract It is undeniable that a ‘follow-on damages claim culture’ is on the rise in Europe. The case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union has been acting as a catalyst to ensure that victims of cartel infringements are in a position to effectively enforce their right to damages. Although the path followed by the Court removed many obstacles for cartel victims it has also departed from traditional concepts of tort law, including liability for civil damages. By extending concepts which were traditionally confined to public enforcement to private enforcement – such as the notion of undertaking – national courts will be faced with new challenges. It is inevitable that questions which were previously of minor importance in public proceedings will carry a different weight in civil litigation. This article focuses on recent developments and explores possible consequences on the imputation of liability in private enforcement of EU competition law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document