Abstract
Historically, a range of factors have combined to ensure that private enforcement is effectively the default setting for antitrust enforcement in general, namely: the wider litigative culture; the significant period of development of antitrust law and economics; and, specific characteristics of US civil procedure - the rules on discovery, the funding of actions, the availability of class actions, and the existence of treble damages actions - together with clarification (and modification) of the legal position in relation to issues such as the
passing-on defence and standing for indirect purchasers. Private antitrust enforcement is a well developed and mature system of litigation in the US, in contrast with the position in the EU.
| Language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages | 1-6 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Competition Law Review |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- private enforcement
- antitrust law
- EU law
Cite this
}
Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches. / Rodger, Barry.
In: Competition Law Review, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2012, p. 1-6.Research output: Contribution to journal › Editorial
TY - JOUR
T1 - Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches
AU - Rodger, Barry
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - It is clear from a cursory examination of the academic literature in the field that private enforcement is an established, well-developed and vibrant mode of enforcement of US antitrust law constituting the preponderance of antitrust enforcement activity; complemented by public enforcement by the DOJ and FTC.Historically, a range of factors have combined to ensure that private enforcement is effectively the default setting for antitrust enforcement in general, namely: the wider litigative culture; the significant period of development of antitrust law and economics; and, specific characteristics of US civil procedure - the rules on discovery, the funding of actions, the availability of class actions, and the existence of treble damages actions - together with clarification (and modification) of the legal position in relation to issues such as the passing-on defence and standing for indirect purchasers. Private antitrust enforcement is a well developed and mature system of litigation in the US, in contrast with the position in the EU.
AB - It is clear from a cursory examination of the academic literature in the field that private enforcement is an established, well-developed and vibrant mode of enforcement of US antitrust law constituting the preponderance of antitrust enforcement activity; complemented by public enforcement by the DOJ and FTC.Historically, a range of factors have combined to ensure that private enforcement is effectively the default setting for antitrust enforcement in general, namely: the wider litigative culture; the significant period of development of antitrust law and economics; and, specific characteristics of US civil procedure - the rules on discovery, the funding of actions, the availability of class actions, and the existence of treble damages actions - together with clarification (and modification) of the legal position in relation to issues such as the passing-on defence and standing for indirect purchasers. Private antitrust enforcement is a well developed and mature system of litigation in the US, in contrast with the position in the EU.
KW - private enforcement
KW - antitrust law
KW - EU law
UR - http://www.clasf.org/CompLRev/Issues/Vol8Issue1EditorialRodger.pdf
M3 - Editorial
VL - 8
SP - 1
EP - 6
JO - Competition Law Review
T2 - Competition Law Review
JF - Competition Law Review
SN - 1745-638X
IS - 1
ER -