Riley, Alan and Peysner, John (2006) Damages in EC antitrust actions: who pays the piper? European Law Review, 31 (5). pp. 748-761. ISSN 0307-5400
Documents |
|
![]() |
PDF
uoa62aw03.pdf - Whole Document Restricted to Registered users only 1MB |
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Item Status: | Live Archive |
Abstract
The prospects for private antitrust enforcement to supplement public enforcement by competition authorities in the EC depends on the mix of incentives and disincentives for private parties to bring action. The perceived advantages that underpin US antitrust litigation; namely, treble damages and wide discovery, can be replicated in the EC by awards of interest and damages above pure compensatory level in specific cases and the leniency procedure can be mined for useful documentation. However, the advantage of access to the courts through contingency fees has limited appeal in Europe and a Contingency Legal Aid Fund, incorporating private and public elements, is proposed.
Additional Information: | The prospects for private antitrust enforcement to supplement public enforcement by competition authorities in the EC depends on the mix of incentives and disincentives for private parties to bring action. The perceived advantages that underpin US antitrust litigation; namely, treble damages and wide discovery, can be replicated in the EC by awards of interest and damages above pure compensatory level in specific cases and the leniency procedure can be mined for useful documentation. However, the advantage of access to the courts through contingency fees has limited appeal in Europe and a Contingency Legal Aid Fund, incorporating private and public elements, is proposed. |
---|---|
Keywords: | Competition law, Legal advice and funding, Private enforcement |
Subjects: | M Law > M120 European Union Law |
Divisions: | College of Social Science > Lincoln Law School |
ID Code: | 882 |
Deposited On: | 27 Sep 2007 |
Repository Staff Only: item control page