The Interaction of Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law before and after the EU Directive – a Hungarian perspective

• Authors: Toth Tihamer
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper explores the changes the EU Directive on harmonizing certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions will bring about in Hungary, with a special focus placed on damages liability rules, the interaction of public and private enforcement of these rules, and the importance of class actions. Amendments of the Competition Act introduced in 2005 and 2009 had created new rules to promote the idea of private enforcement even before the Directive was adopted. Some of these rules remain unique even now, notably the legal presumption of a 10% price increase for cartel cases. However, subsequent cases decided by Hungarian courts did not reflect the sophistication of existing substantive and procedural rules. There has only ever been one judgment awarding damages, while most stand-alone cases involved minor competition law issues relating to contractual disputes. The paper looks at the most important substantial rules of tort law (damage, causality, joint and several liability), the co-operation of competition authorities and civil courts, as well as at (the lack of) class action procedures from the perspective of the interaction of public and private enforcement of competition law.

FR

Le document analyse les changements apportés par la directive européenne relative aux certaines règles régissant les actions en dommages et intérêts en droit national pour les infractions aux dispositions du droit de la concurrence en Hongrie, en particulier concernant les règles sur la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages, l’interaction de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence et l'importance des recours collectifs. Les modifications à loi de la concurrence introduites en 2005 et 2009 ont créé de nouvelles règles pour promouvoir l'idée d'une application privée du droit de la concurrence même avant que la directive a été adoptée. Certaines de ces dispositions sont toujours uniques, notamment la présomption légale d'une augmentation de prix de 10% par les ententes. Néanmoins, les jugements ultérieurs rendus par les tribunaux ne reflétaient pas les règles de fond et de procédures sophistiquées. Il n’y avait juste le jugement qui a accordé des dommages et intérêts, alors que la plupart des actions autonomes (« stand-alone actions ») portaient sur des problèmes secondaires du droit de la concurrence liés aux conflits contractuels. L’article examine des règles les plus importantes du droit de la responsabilité civile (le dommage, la causalité, la responsabilité solidaire), la coopération entre les autorités de la concurrence et les tribunaux civils, ainsi que l’absence de mécanisme de recours collectifs et de la perspective de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence.

Keywords

EN

private enforcement of competition law; public enforcement; discovery; leniency; damages; joint and several liability; amicus curiae; class action; representative action

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Journal: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 9(14)
• Pages: 43-68

Dates

published

2016-12-31

printed

2016-12-31

Contributors

author

Toth Tihamer

• Assistant professor, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Budapest, Hungary; of counsel at Réczicza Dentons Europe LLP

References

• Éless, T. and Németh, Á. (2004). Hungary. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/actionsdamages/national_reports/hungary_en.pdf (17.11.2016).
• Jurkowska-Gomułka, A. (2016). National Report – Poland. In Gy. Bándi, P. Darák, P. Láncos, T. Tóth (eds), Private Enforcement and Collective Redress in European Competition Law, Congress Proceedings, Vol. 2. Budapest: Wolters Kluwer, 516-531.
• Komninos, A.P. (2008). EC Private Antitrust Enforcement – Decentralised Application of EC Competition Law by National Courts. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• Müller-Graf, P.Ch. (2016). General report. In Gy. Bándi, P. Darák, P. Láncos, T. Tóth (eds), Private Enforcement and Collective Redress in European Competition Law, Congress Proceedings, Vol. 2. Budapest: Wolters Kluwer, 66-132.
• Piszcz, A. (2016). Practical Private Enforcement: Perspectives from Poland. In M. Bergström, M. Iacovides, M. Strand (eds), Harmonising EU Competition Litigation, The New Directive and Beyond. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 203-220.
• Shapiro, M. (1981). Courts, A Comparative and Political Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Szilágyi, P. (2012). Hungarian Competition Law & Policy: The Watermelon Omen. Retrieved from: https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/hungarian-competition-law-policy-the-watermelon-omen-3/ (17.11.2016).
• Szilágyi, P. (2013). Private Enforcement of Competition Law and Stand-alone Actions in Hungary. Global Competition Litigation Review 3, 136-142.
• Szilágyi, P. (2014). The Hungarian Experience on Private Enforcement and Class Actions. Global Competition Litigation Review 3, 168-172.
• Tóth, T. (2016). National Report – Hungary. In Gy. Bándi, P. Darák, P. Láncos, T. Tóth (eds), Private Enforcement and Collective Redress in European Competition Law, Congress Proceedings, Vol. 2. Budapest: Wolters Kluwer, 399-420.
• Van Nuffel, P. (2016). Institutional report. In Gy. Bándi, P. Darák, P. Láncos, T. Tóth (eds), Private Enforcement and Collective Redress in European Competition Law, Congress Proceedings, Vol. 2. Budapest: Wolters Kluwer, 134-176.
• Waller, S.W. and Popal, O. (2016). The Fall and Rise of the Antitrust Class Action. World Competition: Law and Economics Review 39(1), 29-55. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2641867
• Wils, W.P.J. (2016). Private enforcement of EU antitrust law and its relationship with public enforcement. Forthcoming in World Competition: Law and Economics Review 40(1), 2017. Retrieved from: available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2865728 (7.11.2016).

Identifiers

ISSN

1689-9024

DOI

10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2016.9.14.2