PL EN


2015 | 8(11) | 35-52
Article title

Development of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Lithuania

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
The article reviews the jurisprudence of Lithuanian courts on private enforcement of competition law and identifies the main obstacles for the development of this practice. The analysis of the jurisprudence makes it possible to summarise that: most rulings of the Lithuanian courts relate to cases on the abuse of dominance; usually, dominant undertakings were allegedly applying discriminatory conditions towards the injured party and; most of the claims were presented as follow-on actions after a decision of the Competition Council. The courts held that damages caused by a breach of competition law have to be recovered in accordance with Lithuania’s main principles of civil responsibility. At the same time, the courts made it clear that their jurisprudence is based on the rulings of European Courts and the main principles of EU competition law. The main obstacles for the successful development of antitrust damages claims in Lithuania are, inter alia: complexity of competition cases; difficulty in obtaining substantive evidence; proving a consequential relationship and; high legal costs. The article also analyses substantial and procedural provisions of Lithuanian legislation that regulate the submission of antitrust damage claims.
Year
Volume
Pages
35-52
Physical description
Dates
published
2015-06-30
Contributors
References
  • Brkan M., Bratina T., ‘Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Slovenia: A New Field to Be Developed by Slovenian Courts’ (2013) 6(8) YARS.
  • Downie G., Charrier M., ‘UK and EU Developments in Collective Action Regimes for Competition Law Breaches’ (2014) E.C.L.R, issue 8.
  • Hjelmeng E., ‘Competition Law Remedies: Striving for Coherence or Finding New Ways?’ (2013) 50 CMLR.
  • Gumbis J., Juonys M., Keserauskas Š., ‘National report for Lithuania concerning the conditions of claims for damages in case of infringement of EC competition rules’ [available at http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/actionsdamages/national_reports/ lithuania_en.pdf].
  • Jurkowska-Gomułka A., ‘Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Polish Courts: The Story of an (Almost) Lost Hope for Development’ (2013) 6(8) YARS.
  • Piszcz A., ‘Still-unpopular Sanctions: Developments in Private Antitrust Enforcement in Poland After the 2008 White Paper’ (2012) 5(7) YARS.
  • Sein K., ‘Private Enforcement of Competition Law – the Case of Estoni’ (2013) 6(8) YARS. Terebeiza Ž., ‘Laisvas įrodymų vertinimas civiliniame procese: teoriniai ir praktiniai
  • aspektai’ (2007) 5(95) Jurisprudencija.
  • Weidt C.F., ‘The Directive on Actions for Antitrust Damages After Passing the European Parliament’ (2014) ECLR 2014, 35(9).
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
ISSN
1689-9024
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-a4d5ceca-06d5-4d21-a3c6-66b8740275a6
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.