Weiter zum Inhalt
  • «
  • 1
  • »

Die Suche erzielte 7 Treffer.

DB Station (C-721/20): How to Reconcile It with Fundamental Rights, Direct Effect and Hierarchy of Norms? Journal Artikel

Miguel Sousa Ferro

European Competition and Regulatory Law Review, Jahrgang 6 (2022), Ausgabe 4, Seite 350 - 355

Case C-721/20 DB Station & Service AG v ODEG Ostdeutsche Eisenbahn GmbH, Judgment of the Court of Justice (Fourth Chamber) of 27 October 2022 The right to damages arising from an infringement of Article 102 TFEU, which may also infringe the railway infrastructure Directive, can only be exercised after using the railway regulator’s appeal procedure. But what happens if the two sets of rules lead to different outcomes? Must the national court follow the regulator’s decision? Are competition authorities similarly prevented from acting? What if the regulator’s decision is not adopted, does not become res judicata or takes too long? And can this case-law be extended to other regulated activities?

The Otis Judgement: Another Conformation of the Expansive Scope of Cartel Liability after Kone (C-435/18 Otis) Journal Artikel

Martin Gassler

European Competition and Regulatory Law Review, Jahrgang 4 (2020), Ausgabe 1, Seite 45 - 48

Case C-435/18 Otis GmbH and others v Land Oberösterreich and others, Judgement of the Court of Justice of 12 December 2019 On 12 December 2019, the Court of Justice (CJ) delivered another preliminary reference ruling that further strengthens private antitrust enforcement in the EU. The CJ followed Advocate General Kokott and ruled that even persons not acting as suppliers or purchasers on the market affected by the cartel can claim damages directly from cartel members. The judgement was delivered upon request by the Austrian Supreme Court (Oberste Gerichtshof) that struggled again – after its request for a preliminary ruling in connection with the same elevator cartel in 2014 that led to the Kone judgement – to apply national tort law that restricted liability of cartel members to only those suppliers and purchasers that are active on the relevant product and geographic market affect by the cartel.

The Dutch Leniency Programme Turns 18: Journal Artikel

Still Having a Hoot, or Pause for Thought?

Nicole Rosenboom

European Competition and Regulatory Law Review, Jahrgang 4 (2020), Ausgabe 3, Seite 194 - 201

Eighteen years ago, the Dutch leniency programme was introduced. The success of the leniency programme is closely linked to the developments around damages claims and firms’ awareness of the impact of other forms of damages. This article looks at past developments in cartel enforcement policy, the impact of damages claims, and deterrent effect of the leniency programme on new and existing cartels and its impact on the number of cartel cases in the Netherlands. It seems that private damages claims are growing up fast, and may well outgrow their younger sibling in terms of their deterrent effect. Keywords: leniency; ACM; private damages; deterrence effect; whistle blower

Competition Authorities’ Decisions and Antitrust Damages Actions Journal Artikel

Ignacio García-Perrote Martínez

European Competition and Regulatory Law Review, Jahrgang 3 (2019), Ausgabe 4, Seite 371 - 379

Private enforcers of competition law, especially the infringers’ direct and indirect purchasers claiming compensation for the damages suffered, must bring evidence of the existence of an infringement of competition law, the loss suffered, the causal relation between the infringement and the damage, and the specific quantum. The most challenging element to prove is the infringement itself. Given competition authorities’ investigation powers, their decisions become a crucial element to ease the claimants’ burden of proof and to make compensation possible. Keywords: Pre-emptive Administrative Ruling, Competition Authorities Decisions, Damages Actions, Competition Law Enforcement

  • «
  • 1
  • »