Many competition laws provide for claims regarding damages by those who have suffered injury from an infringement to the competition law. For example, those who have had to pay higher prices as a result of cartel violations, have the possibility to claim for damages, as restitution of the amounts for which they have been spoliated.
Source: UNCTAD
Despite the best efforts of the European legislator, in some European Member States private enforcement of competition law, that is, private litigation for compensation of cartel overcharges is meagre at best. One of the numerous reasons why private enforcement of competition law mostly fails is the lack of meaningful provisions for determining the damage suffered,…
The 2014 Cartel Damages Directive substantially facilitated cartel damages actions across the EU – the rising number of damages actions ever since its entering into force is a good indication of this development. Nevertheless, the quantification of harm remains the main challenge for claimants, who hold the burden of proof for the amount of harm….
The recent adoption of the Collective Consumer Redress Directive has reignited the discussion on collective private antitrust litigation – any ‘bundling of claims’ – once again. Even though collective redress on an EU level was first seriously discussed in the context of the Damages Directive, competition law does not fall into the scope of the…
Despite the pandemic, 2020 has been a very busy year for the Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) and courts in the field of competition law in Germany. The following is merely a selection of interesting developments. It does not include the recently adopted reform of the Competition Act, which merits its own blog. Generally, the FCO…
Despite best efforts of the European legislator as well as the CJEU, from a claimant’s perspective, private enforcement litigation before German Courts in the trucks cartel [Link] must be an aggravating experience. Although the European Commission fined the members of the cartel extensively, an ‘all-out’-approach of the cartelists and apparently flustered lower courts result in…
Ever since the 2001 Courage judgment, private actions for damages are on the rise. The Commission wanted to quickly follow with a legislative act including minimum standards for private enforcement across the EU. In the end, it took a while. In 2005, the authority published a Green Paper, in 2008 a substantially amended White Paper….
Introduction On 23 September 2020 a former director of one of the North Sea shrimps cartelists was held personally liable for damage of over € 13 million by the Dutch District Court of Noord-Nederland (“Court”). According to the Court, the director’s personal involvement in the cartel qualified as improperly fulfilling his duties as a director. This…
The England and Wales Court of Appeal has overturned the Decision of the United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) in the collective proceedings Walter Merricks v MasterCard, where final consumers are represented by Merricks. This is an important decision because it ensures that financial damages are recoverable when a firm’s anti-competitive practices affect millions of…
In its preliminary ruling in Skanska Industrial Solutions and Others[1], the Court of Justice has ruled on the fundamental question of who is liable to pay compensation in an action for damages for breach of Article 101 TFEU. Is the answer to be found in EU law or national law? Can the person liable to…
In July 2005, Germany adopted a new law providing that the limitation period for damage claims is suspended during the investigation of a competition authority (“Suspension Provision”). Ever since, it was unclear whether the Suspension Provision applies only to infringements committed after the new provision came into force, or whether it has retroactive effect. In…
