Готові списки джерел за темами / Antitrust, damages, private enforcement

Добірка наукової літератури з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

Автор: Grafiati
Опубліковано: 14 березня 2023

Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями

Оберіть тип джерела:

Зміст

Ознайомтеся зі списками актуальних статей, книг, дисертацій, тез та інших наукових джерел на тему "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement".

Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.

Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.

Статті в журналах з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

Wolski, Dominik. "Private antitrust enforcement in digital market." Bratislava Law Review 4, no. 2 (December 31, 2020): 147–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.46282/blr.2020.4.2.210.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The increasing popularity of private antitrust enforcement in the EU is reflected by number of antitrust damages claims in the member states, following the transposition of the Damages Directive. Meanwhile, rapid growth of digitization in every aspect of social and economic life, particularly in business like commerce and services, has taken place. Recently, the above phenomenon was intensified by COVID-19. This paper aims at discussing private antitrust enforcement and antitrust damages claims in the context of digital transformation of the market. To this extent, there are several main characteristics of the market (e.g. multi-sided platforms, the role of third-party sellers, etc.), that have to be taken into consideration in the above discussion.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
2

Wils, Wouter P. J. "The Relationship between Public Antitrust Enforcement and Private Actions for Damages." World Competition 32, Issue 1 (March 1, 2009): 3–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2009002.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
This paper concerns the relationship between public antitrust enforcement and private actions for damages, focusing in particular on the enforcement of Articles 81 and 82 EC. In the first half of the paper, I examine the respective roles of public antitrust enforcement and private actions for damages. I argue that public enforcement should aim at clarifying and developing the antitrust prohibitions and deterring and punishing violations, whereas private actions for damages should aim at compensation. This corresponds to the approach adopted by the European Commission in its 2008 White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, and differs from the US approach which views damages actions as an instrument of deterrence. In the second half of the paper, I analyze a number of specific issues concerning the interaction between public antitrust enforcement and private actions for damages: the binding effect of the finding of a violation in public enforcement proceedings on follow–on actions for damages; access to the public enforcement file; encouragement of voluntary compensation through fine rebates, as a condition for leniency, or as part of settlements; punitive damages; private demand for public enforcement; the impact of private actions for damages on substantive law; and their impact on leniency.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
3

Rosso, Selene. "Ways to Promote Workable Private Antitrust Enforcement in Italy." World Competition 32, Issue 3 (September 1, 2009): 305–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2009033.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
While the European Commission is retreating its proposal to import the US model of private antitrust enforcement, this is gaining ground in Italy, where double damages have been awarded in the well-known Manfredi case. Nevertheless, it is still difficult to be awarded antitrust damages by an Italian court because of several reasons: (1) the labyrinth of the Italian courts, (2) the pliability of the Government to lobbying pressures, and (3) the courts’ reluctance/inability to deploy economic concepts in calculating the amount of damages. Bearing in mind such issues, this article aims to propose viable ways of encouraging private parties to claim antitrust damages before the Italian courts, having regard to the more consolidated US experience and the suggestions put forward by the Commission at EC level. In particular, it shows the benefits of the following proposals: (1) to eliminate the exclusive competence of the Courts of Appeal so that all the cases concerning antitrust damages would go through the normal steps of the Italian judicial hierarchy and (2) to involve the National Competition Authority (NCA) in private litigation, by giving it the task of quantifying antitrust damages.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
4

Wils, Wouter P. J. "Should Private Antitrust Enforcement Be Encouraged in Europe?" World Competition 26, Issue 3 (September 1, 2003): 473–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2003023.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The EC antitrust prohibitions are regularly invoked in private litigation as a shield. Private parties also play an important role in public antitrust enforcement through complaints to the competition authorities. However, in marked contrast with the situation in the US, private actions for damages or for injunctive relief are rare. This article argues that this situation is a desirable one. Indeed, from the perspective of ensuring that the antitrust prohibitions are not violated, public antitrust enforcement is inherently superior to private enforcement, because of more effective investigative and sanctioning powers, because private antitrust enforcement is driven by private profit motives which fundamentally diverge from the general interest in this area, and because of the high cost of private antitrust enforcement. There is not even a case for a supplementary role for private enforcement, as the adequate level of sanctions and the adequate number and variety of prosecutions can be ensured more effectively and at a lower cost through public enforcement. It also seems difficult to justify an increased role for private antitrust enforcement in Europe by the pursuit of corrective justice, as there does not appear to be a clear social need for such action, and because truly achieving corrective justice in the antitrust context is in practice a very difficult task.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
5

Albors-Llorens, Albertina. "Antitrust Damages in EU Law." University of Queensland Law Journal 37, no. 1 (May 18, 2020): 139–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v37i1.4143.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
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.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
6

Piszcz, Anna. "Piecemeal Harmonisation Through the Damages Directive? Remarks on What Received Too Little Attention in Relation to Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law." Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies 8, no. 12 (2015): 79–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2015.8.12.4.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
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
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
7

Mikelėnas, Valentinas, and Rasa Zaščiurinskaitė. "Quantification of Harm and the Damages Directive: Implementation in CEE Countries." Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies 10, no. 5 (2017): 111–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2017.10.15.6.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
Quantification of harm is regarded as one of the most significant obstacles for the full compensation of harm and development of private enforcement within the European Union, including CEE Member States. Consequently, the Damages Directive establishes general rules and requirements for the quantification of harm, such as a rebuttable presumption of harm in case of cartels, the power of national courts to estimate harm as well as others, which closely interact with the principle of full compensation emphasized by the case-law of the European Union and directly established in the Damages Directive. The main focus of this paper is the effectiveness of the rules on the quantification of harm in general, and how these rules will contribute to the development of private antitrust enforcement in CEE Member States. Therefore, one of the issues to be discussed in the paper is the analysis of how, and to what extent specific rules and requirements for the quantification of harm have been transposed into the national legislation of CEE Member States. As certain CEE national jurisdictions have had certain rules for the quantification of harm already before the implementation of the Damages Directive, the paper analyses how effective these rules have been, and how much they have contributed to the development of private antitrust enforcement of those CEE national jurisdictions. Previous experience of those CEE Member States in applying specific rules for the quantification of harm is important, in order to assess the possible impact of the newly introduced rules on the quantification of harm and on private antitrust enforcement in general in other CEE Member States. The rules for the quantification of harm will not enhance private antitrust enforcement on their own, however, their effective application by national courts together with other rules under the Damages Directive should contribute to a quicker development of private enforcement in CEE Members States.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
8

Stanikunas, Rimantas Antanas, and Arunas Burinskas. "The Interaction of Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Lithuania." Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies 8, no. 12 (2015): 237–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2015.8.12.11.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
This paper provides a study of the interaction between public and private enforcement of Lithuanian antitrust law. The study refers to the Damages Directive. It has been found that private enforcement depends greatly on public enforcement of competition law. Therefore, their compatibility and balance are of great importance to antitrust policy. The Lithuanian NCA prioritises cases where an economic effect on competition does not have to be proven. This creates uncertainty about the outcome of private enforcement cases. Private enforcement in Lithuania is also in need of detailed rules on the identification of harm and causality. The analysis reveals how challenging it can be to estimate and prove harm or a causal link in private enforcement cases. Support from the NCA is therefore exceedingly needed. Moreover, even though the use of the leniency programme helps, it remains insufficient to solve the problem of under-deterrence. However, measures introduced by the Damages Directive do not make the leniency programme safe.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
9

Sarra, Alessandro, and Alessandro Marra. "Are Monetary Incentives Enough to Boost Actions for Damages in the European Union? On the Relevance of Incompleteness of Laws and Evidentiary Requirements." World Competition 31, Issue 3 (September 1, 2008): 369–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2008031.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
In this article we intend to contribute to the public debate regarding the lack of private antitrust enforcement in the European Union. The European Commission suggests to concentrate on monetary incentives to boost actions for damages (among them, granting full compensation, promoting aggregate actions, reducing the costs associated with antitrust claims, and so on). We argue that monetary incentives are not sufficient to create an efficient regime of private enforcement of law. In particular, we develop the thesis that to increase the number of effective damages actions is useful to better contemplate the incompleteness of antitrust laws and the relevance of evidentiary requirements needed to initiate a successful lawsuit.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
10

Mouton, Jeanne. "The challenges for private competition law enforcement concerning anticompetitive conducts in digital markets." YEARBOOK OF ANTITRUST AND REGULATORY STUDIES 15, no. 26 (December 2022): 9–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2022.15.26.1.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The paper reviews literature on theories of harm in digital markets, and the specific difficulties in quantifying the damage in private enforcement of competition law. The development of a tentative case-law on private enforcement in digital markets in the European Union is studied next, in comparison to the US antitrust practice, differentiating between businesses or consumers filing damages claims. Finally, the paper raises the specific issues posed by the digital economy for competition law claims for damages, and explores the idea of extending the presumption of harm also to abuse of dominance in digital markets, as well as making private parties aware of cease and desist injunctions or filing for private enforcement remedies.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
Більше джерел

Дисертації з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

RASPANTI, MARIA ROSARIA. "Una struttura a due pilastri per l'antitrust enforcement europeo. Il tentativo di rilancio delle azioni risarcitorie oltre il level playing field?" Doctoral thesis, Università di Siena, 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/11365/1012998.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The present PhD thesis corcerns the perspectives of antitrust damages compensation in the light of EU Directive 2014/104. The work is focused on the likely developments of national and european private antitrust enforcement after the implementation of the Directive, considering how this will impact the level of private enforcement application. After a preliminary analysis of the national and european framework of private enforcement, the work reaches the conclusion that, currently, private enforcement in under-developped, mainly due to a general lack of “antitrust awareness”. That considered, the work tries to understand whether the implementation fo the Directive is likely to boost to the use of private enforcement instruments. To this end, the research focuses on the main instruments introduced or regulated by the Directive, with particular regard to the fields where the game between public and private enforcement is played (such as the topic concerning the binding effect of fining decisions in antitrust damages lawsuits), in order to catch the possible changes that should take to build a “two-pillars” system for the enforcement of antitrust rules. After an in-depth analysis, the work ends up to the conclusion that the implementation is not likely to sensitively boost the application of private antitrust enforcement instruments, as the Directive does not actually impact the main problem, i.e. the lack of antitrust awareness at individuals and undertakings level, therefore having a mere value of creating a level playing field for the application of the rules.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
2

Teras, Tarek. "The monetary impact of the interaction between public and private antitrust enforcement." Thesis, Aix-Marseille, 2018. http://www.theses.fr/2018AIXM0620.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
Afin d'assurer la plénitude des objectifs du droit de la concurrence, la majorité des systèmes juridiques s'appuient tout à la fois sur une mise en œuvre par les sphères privée et publique. Grâce au développement récent dans les règlements européens du rôle privé dans la mise en œuvre du droit de la concurrence, les interactions entre les exécutions privée et publique dans ce domaine sont devenues une réalité d'importance dans le contexte européen. Plus précisément, notre étude examinera les deux principales formes de décisions prises par les autorités de la concurrence, respectivement les « settlements » et les « litigation decisions ». Une « settlement decision », de façon générale, ne peut être utilisée utilement afin d'assurer le succès d'une action privée en dommages et intérêts. C'est pourquoi dans notre travail nous mettrons en lumière les possibles interactions entre l'exécution par les sphères publiques du droit de la concurrence et les compensations pour les victimes de comportements anticoncurrentiels. Les « litigation decisions » imposent habituellement des sanctions pécuniaires à l'encontre des violateurs du droit et pourraient être utilisées en faveur des demandeurs dans les actions de suivi en dommages et intérêts. Nous observerons les conséquences économiques et légales de ces interactions dans la cohabitation des amendes et du préjudice dans le domaine du droit de la concurrence. Dans notre thèse nous discuterons de la situation actuelle et récente de l'Europe, au regard du développement de ces interactions entre les deux sphères, en l'éprouvant à la lumière de l'expérience américaine en la matière
In order to achieve the various objectives of antitrust law, the majority of legal systems use both public and private enforcement. Because of the recent development of private enforcement under the European rules, the interaction between public and private enforcement has become a reality in the European context. More precisely, our study examines two main types of decisions made by antitrust authorities, namely settlements and litigation decisions. A settlement decision, generally speaking, cannot be used to help ensure the success of private action for damages. This is why, in our study, we highlight the possibility of an interaction between public settlement decisions and compensation of victims of anticompetition behaviors. The litigation decisions usually impose monetary sanctions on the infringer of the antitrust law and provide presumptions which are helpful for the claimant in follow-on action for damages before the court. We examine the legal and economic consequences of the interaction between the fines and damages in the antitrust legal area. We underline in more detail that, under the new European and the National rules of member states of the European Union, we will observe an increase in follow-on action. This increase will lead to more interaction between fines and damages. Finding the best means to evaluate this new monetary charge on infringers of antitrust law has become a very important legal and economic question. In this study, we discuss the recent European situation with regards to the monetary impact of the interaction between public and private enforcement in the light of the American experience with the matter
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
3

Martins, Frederico Bastos Pinheiro. "Obstáculos às ações privadas de reparação de danos decorrentes de cartéis." reponame:Repositório Institucional do FGV, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/10438/18247.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
Submitted by Frederico Martins (frederico.martins2015@gvmail.br) on 2017-05-15T16:49:36Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5)
Approved for entry into archive by Joana Martorini (joana.martorini@fgv.br) on 2017-05-15T17:26:00Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-15T18:58:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-04-17
O presente estudo aborda com detalhes obstáculos ao ajuizamento de ações privadas de reparação de danos de cartéis no Brasil, notadamente mediante análise dos institutos de direito envolvidos, comparação do tratamento dado a eles em outras jurisdições, análise da interpretação que as cortes brasileiras têm dado a eles nas poucas ações privadas de ressarcimento contra cartéis ajuizadas até o momento, bem como entrevistas de autoridade do CADE para trazer à pesquisa o ponto de vista da autoridade concorrencial, sobretudo no que diz respeito ao compartilhamento de documentos do processo administrativo. Ao final da abordagem de cada tema, buscou-se oferecer soluções propositivas para a superação dos referidos obstáculos e, com isso, fornecer substratos para desenvolvimento das ações privadas de ressarcimento de danos decorrentes de cartéis.
The present study addresses in detail the obstacles to private enforcement of cartels in Brazil, through the analysis of the applicable legal principles, comparing the treatment given to them in other jurisdictions, and analyzing the interpretation that Brazilian courts have given to them in the few private lawsuits for compensations of cartel damages filed in Brazil so far. Interviews with the Brazilian antitrust authority were also conducted in order to bring its point of view to the research, especially regarding the sharing of documents of the administrative proceeding. Concluding each topic of the study, we tried to offer propositive solutions to overcome these obstacles and, with this, to provide tools for the development of private enforcement of cartels in Brazil.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
4

LIBRICI, Pietro. "L’ILLECITO ANTITRUST DOPO LA DIRETTIVA 2014/104/UE." Doctoral thesis, Università degli Studi di Palermo, 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/10447/400297.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
Tradizionalmente, tanto a livello nazionale quanto a livello comunitario, la tutela della concorrenza si è caratterizzata per l’impiego di strumenti di enforcement pubblicistico. Dopo un lungo iter, il 26 novembre 2014 è stata pubblicata la direttiva del Parlamento Europeo e del Consiglio UE 2014/104 relativa a determinate norme che regolano le azioni per il risarcimento del danno ai sensi del diritto nazionale per violazioni delle disposizioni del diritto della concorrenza degli Stati membri e dell'Unione europea. In Italia il recepimento della Direttiva è avvenuto il 19 gennaio 2017 con il d.lgs. n. 3/2017. Sebbene la normativa in parola intervenga a colmare il vuoto creato dall’assenza, sia ambito nazionale che comunitario, di norme di diritto positivo dirette a prevedere esplicitamente la possibilità di promuovere un’azione per il risarcimento del danno sulla base di una violazione delle disposizioni antitrust, essa lascia irrisolte problematiche di notevole importanza. L'obiettivo che ci si propone di raggiungere, pertanto, è quello di verificare i tratti fondamentali della disciplina dell'azione di risarcimento del danno conseguente alla violazione di norme antitrust alla luce della stratificazione di dottrina, giurisprudenza e prassi createsi intorno alla private litigation antitrust in anni recenti. Ciò anche al fine di offrire un contributo utile a fornire le coordinate atte a propiziare un corretto approccio ai tanti risvolti problematici che la nuova disciplina lascia insoluti.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
5

Peyer, Sebastian. "Private antitrust enforcement in Europe : empirics, policy and remedies." Thesis, University of East Anglia, 2010. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.539343.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
6

Alen, Balde. "Private antitrust law enforcement in cases with international elements." Thesis, University of Glasgow, 2016. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/7060/.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The Supreme Court of the United States consented in its Empagran decision that the foreign antitrust injury that is in a dependency relationship with anticompetitive effects (antitrust injury) in the U.S. is to be litigated before the U.S. courts. Since this decision antitrust law litigation in an international context does not depend merely on anticompetitive effects in the U.S., but also on the relationship between anticompetitive effect and (foreign) private antitrust injury. This is something that was not present in pre-Empagran cases. The Supreme Court did not provide conditions on the basis of which the relationship between anticompetitive effects and private antitrust injury could be classified as one of dependency. This means that the Supreme Court left the determination of these conditions to lower U.S. courts. The lower U.S. courts, instead of attempting to determine these conditions, have made foreign private antitrust injury even more difficult to litigate before the U.S. courts. There are three factors that contributed to this development in U.S. case law: the understanding of the Empagran litigation; the understanding of the nature of the international context, and U.S. courts taking a pro-active role in delivering their decisions for which the reasoning is difficult to understand. The greatest obstacle that post-Empagran U.S. courts have placed in front of private antitrust litigants is the requirement that instead of ‘dependency connection’ there should be ‘direct causation’ between anticompetitive effects in the U.S. and litigated (foreign) private antitrust injury. This thesis considers the existing theoretical and practical problems of the current analytical framework under which antitrust violation is analysed in an international context. The thesis introduces the new legal concept of a ‘transborder standard’. This is necessitated by the starting position of this thesis that a factual situation under adjudication cannot be only either ‘domestic’ or ‘foreign’, but can also be ‘transborder’. The introduction of the transborder standard to the existing theoretical framework enables (and requires) the analysis of the factual situation under adjudication in its integrity, bearing in mind also the purpose of private antitrust law enforcement and the right of private parties to be compensated for suffered antitrust injury. The transborder standard provides a framework to analyse antitrust claims brought before the U.S. courts by those private parties who satisfy their private antitrust injury outside the U.S. At the same time, the transborder standard does not enable private litigants to take advantage of simultaneous antitrust litigation before U.S. courts and the courts of non-U.S. countries. ‘Transborder standard’ is a new legal concept. Nevertheless, the existing system of U.S. antitrust law enforcement does support it and, consequently, the transborder standard can be directly applied.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
7

Welter, Dominik [Verfasser], and Stefan [Akademischer Betreuer] Napel. "Essays on Private Antitrust Enforcement / Dominik Welter ; Betreuer: Stefan Napel." Bayreuth : Universität Bayreuth, 2020. http://d-nb.info/1211670759/34.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
8

Smuda, Florian [Verfasser], and Gerhard [Akademischer Betreuer] Wagenhals. "Essays on public and private antitrust enforcement / Florian Smuda. Betreuer: Gerhard Wagenhals." Hohenheim : Kommunikations-, Informations- und Medienzentrum der Universität Hohenheim, 2015. http://d-nb.info/1072146614/34.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
9

Kammin, Julian [Verfasser]. "Reforming Private Antitrust Enforcement in Europe: Between Harmonisation and Regulatory Competition. / Julian Kammin." Berlin : Duncker & Humblot, 2014. http://d-nb.info/1238434347/34.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
10

Stirling, Grant. "EU's Private Damages Directive : sufficiently framed to achieve its underlying aims and objectives?" Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/1842/31444.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
This thesis seeks to address the question: to what extent is the EU Directive on Antitrust Damages Actions sufficiently framed in its terms to achieve its underlying aims and objectives? It is argued that the Directive has one overriding goal: to make it easier for the victims of infringements of EU competition law - typically end-consumers - to claim compensation from the infringers. It is also argued that the authors of the Directive present a convincing case that one of the main reasons for the lack of victims claiming - let alone being awarded - compensation, prior to the adoption of the Directive, is weaknesses with the existing legal framework governing competition law damages actions at national level. The thesis examines four of the main areas covered by the Directive: disclosure of evidence; the effect of NCA decisions; limitation periods; and indirect purchaser standing and the passing-on defence. In each case, the relevant rules from the Directive are set out and an assessment is carried out. A crucial part of this assessment consists of seeking to ascertain the problems facing potential claimants prior to the adoption of the Directive and asking whether the Directive appears well-framed in terms of addressing those problems. As well as considering case law of the EU courts, the legal rules and jurisprudence of two leading Member States - the United Kingdom and Italy - are used as primary case studies in carrying out this assessment. The assessment of the measures considered in this thesis is a nuanced one. It is argued that the measures set out in Chapter II of the Directive on disclosure of evidence are generally well-framed and beneficial for claimants, crucially showing a keen understanding of the relationship between private and public enforcement. The assessment of Article 9, on the effect of NCA decisions is much less positive. It is argued that the measures are drafted in vague terms and compare unfavourably with existing rules and practices in the two case-study Member States. It is argued that while the measures set out in Article 10 on limitation periods do represent an improvement for claimants in certain respects, there are a number of key issues that they fail to address. Finally, the assessment of Articles 12 to 15 on indirect purchaser standing and the passing-on defence is positive in some respects, but it is argued that many of the measures do not adequately address the issues that they purport to tackle. It is also argued that these measures are unlikely to bear fruit, without certain issues which are not covered by the Directive, being addressed. Ultimately it is concluded that the Directive makes some important strides towards the realisation of its underlying aims and objectives, but that many of the measures examined are found to be too vague, too weak or too incomplete to fully address the key issues and that the Directive also fails to address some important issues at all.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
Більше джерел

Книги з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

Cave, Jonathan A. K. Multiple damages in private antitrust suits. Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 1988.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
2

Cortese, Bernardo. EU competition law: Between public and private enforcement. Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2014.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
3

Private enforcement of competition law. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2011.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
4

1949-, Basedow Jürgen, ed. Private enforcement of EC competition law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2007.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
5

Private enforcement of antitrust law in the EU, UK, and USA. Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
6

Private enforcement of antitrust law in the United States: A handbook. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2012.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
7

Rosenberg, David. Coordinating private class action and public agency enforcement of antitrust law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Law School, 2005.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
8

Rodger, Barry J. Competition law, comparative private enforcement and collective redress across the EU. Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2014.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
9

Scholl, Carl-Christian. Kollektiver Rechtsschutz im Kartellrecht: Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung zum Private Enforcement im Kartellrecht. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 2011.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
10

Andreangeli, Arianna. Private enforcement of antitrust: Regulating corporate behaviour through collective claims in the EU and US. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2014.

Знайти повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
Більше джерел

Частини книг з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

Hüschelrath, Kai, and Heike Schweitzer. "Quantifying Antitrust Damages – Economics and the Law." In Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Europe, 121–40. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43975-3_8.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
2

Hüschelrath, Kai, and Heike Schweitzer. "The Interaction of Public and Private Antitrust Enforcement – The Calculation of Fines and Damages." In Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Europe, 63–76. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43975-3_5.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
3

Skara, Gentjan. "Transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Selected EU-Member States: The Case of Austria, Italy and Slovenia." In Europeanisation of Private Enforcement of Competition Law, 155–214. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97034-5_5.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
4

Skara, Gentjan. "The Directive on Right to Damages: Legal Aspects and Implications." In Europeanisation of Private Enforcement of Competition Law, 99–151. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97034-5_4.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
5

Skara, Gentjan. "The Role of the Commission in Facilitating and Encouraging the Right to Damages." In Europeanisation of Private Enforcement of Competition Law, 63–96. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97034-5_3.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
6

Hüschelrath, Kai, and Heike Schweitzer. "Disgorgement and Private Enforcement as Mitigating Circumstances for the Determination of Fines in Antitrust Law." In Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Europe, 105–19. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43975-3_7.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
7

Hüschelrath, Kai, and Heike Schweitzer. "The Interaction of Public and Private Enforcement – The Calculation and Reconciliation of Fines and Damages in Europe and Germany." In Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Europe, 77–104. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43975-3_6.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
8

Zimmermann, Andreas. "Would the World Be a Better Place If One Were to Adopt a European Approach to State Immunity? Or, ‘Soll am Europäischen Wesen die Staatenimmunität Genesen’?" In Remedies against Immunity?, 219–33. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62304-6_12.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
AbstractThis chapter argues not only that there is no European Sonderweg (or ‘special way’) when it comes to the law of state immunity but that there ought not to be one. Debates within The Hague Conference on Private International Law in the late 1990s and those leading to the adoption of the 2002 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States, as well as the development of the EU Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement, as amended in 2015, all demonstrate that state immunity was not meant to be limited by such treaties but ‘safeguarded’. Likewise, there is no proof that regional European customary law limits state immunity when it comes to ius cogens violations, as Italy and (partly) Greece are the only European states denying state immunity in such cases while the European Court of Human Rights has, time and again, upheld a broad concept of state immunity. It therefore seems unlikely that in the foreseeable future a specific European customary law norm on state immunity will develop, especially given the lack of participation in such practice by those states most concerned by the matter, including Germany. This chapter considers the possible legal implications of the jurisprudence of the Italian Constitutional Court for European military operations (if such operations went beyond peacekeeping). These implications would mainly depend on the question of attribution: if one where to assume that acts undertaken within the framework of military operations led by the EU were to be, at least also, attributable to the troop-contributing member states, the respective troop-contributing state would be entitled to enjoy state immunity exactly to the same degree as in any kind of unilateral military operations. Additionally, some possible perspectives beyond Sentenza 238/2014 are examined, in particular concerning the redress awarded by domestic courts ‘as long as’ neither the German nor the international system grant equivalent protection to the victims of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during World War II. In the author’s opinion, strengthening the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals, bringing interstate cases for damages before the International Court of Justice, as well as providing for claims commissions where individual compensation might be sought for violations of international humanitarian law would be more useful and appropriate mechanisms than denying state immunity.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
9

Jones, Alison, Brenda Sufrin, and Niamh Dunne. "14. Private Enforcement." In Jones & Sufrin's EU Competition Law, 1019–57. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198824657.003.0014.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
This chapter focuses on the private civil enforcement of EU antitrust rules through claims made by private litigants in the national courts and tribunals of the individual Member States. The discussions cover the principle of direct effect and national procedural autonomy, mechanisms for cooperation between the Commission and national courts, the obligations of national courts when dealing with cases that raise the issue of whether a contract in violation of Article 101 or Article 102 is enforceable and whether, and if so when, damages and injunctions should be available to remedy such violations. It also considers wy historically there was relatively little antitrust litigation in the EU; the relationship between public and private enforcement; the Commission's policy towards private enforcement, the package of measures the Commission has taken to encourage private litigation, especially the 2014 Damages Directive and its likely impact.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
10

Barry, Rodger, Ferro Miguel Sousa, and Marcos Francisco. "Part I EU Competition Law Private Enforcement and the Antitrust Damages Directive, 1 Damages Actions in the Enforcement of EU Competition Law." In The EU Antitrust Damages Directive. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/law-ocl/9780198812760.003.0001.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
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.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

Тези доповідей конференцій з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

Hornkohl, Lena. "THE PRESUMPTION OF HARM IN EU PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT OF COMPETITION LAW: EFFECTIVENESS VS OVERCOMPENSATION." In International Jean Monnet Module Conference of EU and Comparative Competition Law Issues "Competition Law (in Pandemic Times): Challenges and Reforms. Faculty of Law, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.25234/eclic/18813.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
The main issue that is still disrupting private enforcement of competition law is the calculation of damages. The 2014 Damages Directive contains some alleviations. Particularly Article 17(2) Damages Directive foresees a rebuttable presumption that cartels cause harm. Despite the clear statement in Recital 47 Damages Directive that this presumption should not cover the concrete amount of harm and studies that vary significantly regarding the typical overcharge, some Member States have created presumptions related to the amount of harm. Other Member States want to expand the presumption to non-cartel violations. This article takes a comparative analysis of the different Member States approaches and attempts to test the Damages Directive and EU competition law boundaries more generally. The article takes a sceptical perspective on some of the Member States’ approaches and proposes other solutions to ease the predicaments of damage quantifications: (i) a focus on illicit gains, (ii) amending the calculation guidelines and create a EU-wide competition damages database, (iii) create further procedural measures, such as collective redress instruments, special legal venues for private enforcement of competition law and expert judges, and (iv) foster further party-led solutions.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
2

Kocev, Ljuben. "ACTIONS FOR DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF EU COMPETITION LAW – EFFICIENT MARKET PROTECTION THROUGH PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT: WITH EMPHASIS ON NORTH MACEDONIA." In EU 2020 – lessons from the past and solutions for the future. Faculty of Law, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11931.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
3

Sharma, Ajay Kumar. "HSE and City Gas Distribution." In ASME 2017 India Oil and Gas Pipeline Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/iogpc2017-2452.

Повний текст джерела
Анотація:
City Gas Distribution is one of the most assured businesses in current times as Natural Gas being a clean fuel becomes the first choice of consumers. Though CGD Network has enormous potential and has evident advantages however, it brings alongwith it’s own challenges but the biggest challenge is the vicinity of CGD Network with common public. A major factor for success of CGD Network depends on the discipline and involvement of common public in keeping CGD Network safe and effective. This paper intends to discuss on HSE issues with focus on like Single Call system for India, Indian regulations Vs other countries and Quality Assurance. Single Call system for India is the most important issue of CGD Network that really needs to be deliberated. In India, more than 20 clearances need to be obtained from various statutory and civil authorities before execution of any CGD Network project which really affects the project cost, time, consumer benefits, emergency response and third party damages. Now let’s consider few international regulations like National Energy Board in Canada which is the nodal agency to ensure CGD pipelines are safe for public and environment. NEB regulations harmonize with provinces to ensure that any third party excavation work within pipeline corridor is carried out only after due communication to the pipeline company. The 49 US Code 60114 - One Call notification system also mandates that any third party before carrying out any excavation needs to establish if there are underground facilities present in the area of the intended activity and contact appropriate system. Indian regulations like T4S and ERDMP for CGD Network are indeed bringing all CGD companies at par in terms of design, safety, O&M and Integrity Management System. However, they need to sincerely look into Single Call System alongwith specific issues like interdistances, space constraints in big cities, compressor installation at height. Quality Assurance involves periodic inspection and maintenance of CGD asset through a systematic plan including identification of critical equipments, Preventive Maintenance Schedules, carrying out maintenance as per the PM, maintaining a database of observations and defects. A key component is the generation of baseline data for implementing and monitoring Integrity Management System for CGD Network. Hence, as CGD Network is a complex and dynamic distribution system involving public, private industries/commercials, civil authorities and wide geography, it is imperative to have a multi-pronged approach involving strict regulation enforcement, well informed public and latest technologies to ensure safe and efficient CGD Networks.
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

Звіти організацій з теми "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement"

1

Polinsky, A. Mitchell. Detrebling versus Decoupling Antitrust Damages: Lessons from the Theory of Enforcement. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, February 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w1846.

Повний текст джерела
Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.
Також вас можуть зацікавити розширені добірки на тему "Antitrust, damages, private enforcement" для конкретних типів джерел:
Статті в журналах Дисертації Книги
Ми пропонуємо знижки на всі преміум-плани для авторів, чиї праці увійшли до тематичних добірок літератури. Зв'яжіться з нами, щоб отримати унікальний промокод!

До бібліографії