Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  antitrust damage
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Slovenia: A New Field to Be Developed by Slovenian Courts

100%
Brkan M., Bratina T.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2013
|
vol. 6(8)
75-106
EN
This contribution aims to demonstrate the legal framework that can shape and influence private enforcement in Slovenia. This includes, in particular, conditions for damage claims, collective redress mechanisms, legal costs and fees as well as discovery and burden of proof. It is shown which legislative changes may be needed in order to improve the effectiveness of private enforcement and the practical obstacles that will have to be overcome in the future. Furthermore, the article analyses the jurisprudence of Slovenian courts concerning private enforcement. Although there was practically no jurisprudence in this area only a few years ago, Slovenian courts have now ruled on a few such cases already. The number of private enforcement proceedings will most likely increase in the future. Therefore, it can be stated that private enforcement of competition law is an area that is slowly, but steadily, gaining importance in the Slovenian legal system.
FR
La présente contribution vise à démontrer le cadre juridique susceptible de former et d’influencer la mise en œuvre des règles de concurrence de l'UE à l'initiative de la sphère privée (« private enforcement ») en Slovénie. Les conditions pour des recours en dommages et intérêts, des mécanismes des recours collectifs, des règles sur des dépens ainsi que la divulgation des preuves et la charge de la preuve y sont analysés. La contribution démontre quelles modifications législatives seraient nécessaires et quelles obstacles pratiques devront être surmontés à l’avenir afin d’améliorer l’effectivité de ce type de mise en œuvre du droit de la concurrence. La jurisprudence des juridictions Slovènes dans ce domaine y est également analysée. Même si cette jurisprudence a été pratiquement inexistante il y a quelques années, les juridictions Slovènes ont, jusqu’à présent, rendu déjà quelques arrêts dans ce domaine et il est à attendre que le nombre de ce type d’affaires accroîtra dans le futur. Ainsi, il est possible de constater que l’importance de ce type de mise en œuvre du droit de la concurrence augmentera lentement mais sûrement dans l’ordre juridique slovène.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Polish Courts: The Story of an (Almost) Lost Hope for Development

100%
Jurkowska-Gomułka A.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2013
|
vol. 6(8)
107-128
EN
The article reviews judgments of Polish courts on private enforcement of competition law between 1993 and 2012. A quantitative analysis of this jurisprudence shows that very few cases of that type exist at all. Their qualitative characteristics illustrate that: none of them referred to consumers; none of the claims was a 'pure' damage claim; all of these cases focused on partial or general nullity of contracts concluded as a result of an anticompetitive practice; almost all of them concerned an abuse of a dominant position; only one referred to competition-restricting agreements. The relevant jurisprudence largely focused on the binding force of a prior decision of the Polish competition body upon civil courts. Even if the fact that some cases of this type were at all record might suggest that there is a potential for developing private enforcement of antitrust in Poland, nothing like this actually happened. Unfortunately, the Act on Collective Redress (in force since July 2010) has not contributed to a growth in the number of consumers (or any other entities) engaging in court disputes with undertakings restricting competition.
FR
L’article passe en revue les jugements des tribunaux polonais sur l’application privée du droit de la concurrence entre 1993 et 2012. Une analyse quantitative de cette jurisprudence montre que très peu de cas de ce type existent. Leurs caractéristiques qualitatives montrent que : aucun d’entre eux ne concernait les consommateurs ; aucune des revendications ne constituait une demande d’indemnisation dans le sense exacte ; tous ces cas axaient sur la nullité partielle ou générale des contrats conclus à la suite d‘une pratique anticoncurrentielle ; la quasi-totalité d’entre eux concernaient un abus de position dominante ; une seule visait aux accords restreignant la concurrence. La jurisprudence se concentrait surtout sur la force contraignante d’une décision préalable de l’organe polonais de la concurrence prise par des tribunaux civils. Même si le fait que certains cas de ce type-là étaient notés, il pourrait suggérer qu’il existe un potentiel de développement de l’application privée de la concurrence en Pologne – rien que cela ne s’est réellement passé. Malheureusement, la Loi sur les recours collectif (en vigueur depuis juillet 2010) n’a pas contribué à une augmentation du nombre de consommateurs (ou d’autres entités) s’engageant dans des litiges judiciaires avec les entreprises qui restreignent la concurrence.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Development of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Lithuania

84%
Moisejevas R.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2015
|
vol. 8(11)
35-52
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.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Passing-on of Overcharges and the Implementation of the Damages Directive in CEE Countries

84%
Moisejevas R.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2017
|
vol. 10(15)
133-146
EN
The article focuses on the concept of passing-on of overcharges and the peculiarities of its regulation by the Damages Directive. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the defendant in an action for damages may invoke the passing-on defence. Moreover, the Directive establishes the new framework and the main principles that govern the application of the passing-on defence. The national case law on passing-on is very insignificant in Central and Eastern European countries and many questions are expected to be raised in the courts of the CEE Member States. While discussing the concept of passing-on in the Damages Directive, a lot of emphasis should be paid to the issue of causation. Causation will definitely be the subject of most of the questions in cases when an indirect purchaser will bring a claim for damages. Causation may be tricky when an indirect purchaser claims it suffered an ‘overcharge harm’ because of passing-on. In most cases, the issue of causation will be decided mainly by national courts based on national procedural rules. Depending on the situation, passing-on may be used as a basis for the claim (as a ‘sword’) or as a defence (as a ‘shield’). It could be used as a basis for the claim by an indirect purchaser, in case s/he has suffered any harm because of the illegal actions of a cartelist or a dominant company. At the same time, it could be used as a defence by the infringer against a claim for damages. The article also analyses the specifics of the implementation of the Directive into the national laws of CEE Member States.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Damages Directive and Consensual Approach to Antitrust Enforcement

67%
Moisejevas R.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2015
|
vol. 8(12)
181-194
EN
The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.