Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

Abstract

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.
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-6
Number of pages6
JournalCompetition Law Review
Volume8
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

antitrust law
empirical research
legal position
damages
EU
funding
examination
economics
literature

Keywords

  • private enforcement
  • antitrust law
  • EU law

Cite this

@article{5c919e4e0def475088e69e7cfb619b0f,
title = "Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "private enforcement , antitrust law, EU law",
author = "Barry Rodger",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "1--6",
journal = "Competition Law Review",
issn = "1745-638X",
number = "1",

}

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 -