scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Private damages in EU competition law and arbitration: a changing landscape

Miriam Driessen-Reilly
- 01 Dec 2015 - 
- Vol. 31, Iss: 4, pp 567-587
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this paper, the authors discuss the potential impact of the EU Directive on the use of arbitration to obtain private damages within the EU and conclude on the potential for arbitration in this area in the future and whether the Directive is likely to have much of an impact in this regard.
Abstract
There are various obstacles within the EU Member States, which currently prevent, to a greater or lesser extent, the possibility to successfully obtain damages for harm caused by an infringement of the EU competition rules. On 26 November 2014, an EU Directive on antitrust damages actions was adopted. This sets out some minimum ground rules in order to level the playing field across the Member States with a view to making it easier to actually pursue such actions and claims successfully. On a broader level, the Directive has incorporated specific provisions to promote the effective use of consensual dispute resolution as an alternative route to enabling the victims of EU competition law infringements to obtain compensation. This paper discusses the provisions of the Directive, in terms of its potential impact on the use of arbitration to obtain private damages within the EU. It outlines and analyses the existing legislative framework in relation to the public and private enforcement of EU competition law within the EU, the possibility to arbitrate EU competition law infringements and arbitration of EU competition law in practice. It then outlines and discusses both the provisions of the Directive in relation to consensual dispute resolution and some of its most relevant and noteworthy other provisions, in particular with regard to their potential impact on the arbitration of cases involving EU competition law infringements. Finally, the paper concludes on the potential for arbitration in this area in the future and whether the Directive is likely to have much of an impact in this regard. Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions (2014) Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (2004) Case 102/81 Nordsee v Reederei Mond , European Court of Justice (1982) Case C-88/91 Federconsorzi , European Court of Justice (1992) Cases C-430/93 and C-431/93 Van Schijndel and van Veen v Stichting Pensioenfonds voor Fysiotherapeuten , European Court of Justice (1995) Case C-126/97 Eco Swiss China Time Ltd v Benetton International NV , European Court of Justice (1999) Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v Soler Chrysler Plymouth Inc , US Supreme Court (1985)

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

The state of research on arbitration and EU law : Quo vadis European arbitration?

TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a systematic literature review of studies on arbitration in recent decades, focusing on emerging developments in arbitration and EU law, and summarize its major findings to provide a better understanding of new trends in the scholarly literature on arbitration.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Damages Directive and Consensual Approach to Antitrust Enforcement

Abstract: The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts.
Journal ArticleDOI

The damages directive and consensual approach to antitrust enforcement

TL;DR: In this paper, the Damages Directive has been used to define the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages in the field of private enforcement disputes.
Journal ArticleDOI

EU Internal Market Law and the Law of International Commercial Arbitration: Have the EU Chickens Come Home to Roost?

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine, from the perspective of EU public economic law, these areas of conflict to assess the extent to which the Internal Market needs harmonised rules on commercial arbitration to support dispute resolution and access to an efficient delivery of justice within its operation.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Effectiveness of Antitrust Collective Litigation in the European Union: A Study of the Principle of Full Compensation

TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that full compensation is impossible in practice, because compensating direct purchasers and indirect purchasers will inevitably fail to a greater or lesser degree, and that the EU's compensation-based mechanism, with a specific emphasis on full compensation, has more of a need for deterrence-based tools than the US.
Related Papers (5)