Competition Damages Actions in the EU
Law and Practice, Second Edition
David Ashton
abusive behaviour
damage caused by see quantification of damages, damage caused by abusive conduct
damage estimation see quantification of damages, abusive behaviour and damage estimation
access to evidence see evidence disclosure
Amaro, R 11.253
Angrist, J 14.81
applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation 13.01–42
Article 4 and rules for specific tort claims 13.06–7, 13.31
market of forum must be ‘directly and substantially affected’ by infringement 13.14–15, 13.19
applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation 13.08–42
applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation, effects-based approach (Article 6(3)(a)) 13.29–42
damage-localisation problems and Mosaikbetrachtung13.35–8
Mosaikbetrachtung as concurrent matter of jurisdiction and applicable law 13.39–42
and supra-national markets 13.36
applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation, lex fori approach 13.11–28, 13.32
concerns 13.23–8
‘direct and substantial effect’ test 13.15–18, 13.19, 13.29
effects-based approach 13.17
foreseeability test 13.15
and forum shopping 13.15
judicial cooperation concerns 13.25–6
and policy shopping 13.28
substantive de minimis test 13.17
US law comparison 13.20–22
US law comparison, ‘direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable effect’ test 13.22
apportionment, quantification of damages see quantification of damages, apportionment
Arrow, K 14.17
Ashurst study 0.15
assignment of claims, collective action see collective action, assignment of claims
attribution of responsibility 8.01–44
Finland 8.28–37
Germany 8.16–21
attribution of responsibility, EU law 8.01–13
asset transfers 8.05
and Directive 8.08–12
economic succession doctrine 8.04
parental liability 8.03
successors, lack of 8.05
attribution of responsibility, national law 8.14–44
‘decisive influence’ test 8.03, 8.14, 8.22
economic succession doctrine 8.15
attribution of responsibility, national law, Austria 8.22–7
in personam liability 8.27
joint and several liability of related companies 8.22–6
attribution of responsibility, national law, Finland 8.28–37
economic succession doctrine 8.29–31, 8.33–7
effectiveness and equivalence principles 8.35
liability for damages through causal connection 8.28
parental liability 8.30–33
attribution of responsibility, national law, Germany 8.16–21
in personam liability 8.21
liability requiring fault 8.19–20
parent company and subsidiary as separate legal entities 8.17–18
undertaking concept 8.17–19
attribution of responsibility, national law, Latvia 8.38–44
economic succession doctrine 8.38, 8.40–41, 8.44
liability in damages actions 8.42–3
parental liability 8.38–9
undertaking concept 8.38
Austria
attribution of responsibility 8.22–7
Civil Code 2.41, 2.43, 3.119, 8.26, 8.80–81, 9.48–51, 9.128
Code of Civil Procedure 7.66
evidence disclosure 5.129–33
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.62
in personam liability 8.27
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.106–23
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on, third-party notice 3.109, 3.114, 3.119
interest provisions 9.127–8
joint and several liability, advantage for immunity recipients 8.80–84
joint and several liability of related companies 8.22–6
limitation periods 9.48–52
presumption of harm 7.37–9
quantification of loss 7.66
scope of damage recoverable 7.10
underlying right to damages 2.41–3
Baker, D 11.84
balance of probabilities test
causation of infringements 6.33
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.41, 3.82
Basedow, J 2.53, 9.120, 11.09, 12.89
Beisner, J 11.30
bid-rigging 8.87, 9.84, 14.06, 14.07
Bishop, S 14.01
Bolotova, Y 14.19
Boos, A 3.94, 4.150, 4.155, 8.77
brand damages, indirect purchaser standing 3.09, 3.166
breach of statutory duty, underlying right to damages 2.23, 2.30, 2.33, 2.54, 2.63
Brealey, M 3.43
Bredenoord-Spoek, M 11.175, 11.247
Buccirossi, P 14.96
Bulst, W 12.92
bundled claims 3.66–70, 11.187–8, 11.204
Buntscheck, M 11.203
burden of proof
evidence disclosure 4.19, 4.33, 4.34
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.40–52, 3.56, 3.82, 3.84–5, 3.93, 3.94–6, 3.161
business opportunity loss 6.32–3
business secrets 5.88, 5.91–6, 5.97, 5.102
Buxbaum, H 11.237
causation of infringements 6.01–41
balance of probabilities test 6.33
conditio sine qua non approach 6.03–6, 6.20
contractual link between claimant and members of cartel 6.19
de facto policy 6.06
English authorities on 12.95–6
equivalence and effectiveness principles 6.16
EU competition law damages actions 6.12–30
EU law 6.09–11
EU law, extra-contractual liability 6.10
foreseeability examination 6.23–4
liability though causal connection, Finland 8.28, 8.87
loss of business opportunity claim 6.32–3
lost profits claim 6.32
national courts in competition litigation 6.31–4
national courts in competition litigation, England and Wales 6.32–3
national courts in competition litigation, Germany 6.34
place of causal event 12.51–3, 12.54–73
policy-orientated approaches 6.05–8
and quantification of damages 14.129–33
quantification of harm 6.35–41
Schutznorm concept 2.15, 2.17, 6.23, 6.25, 6.29–30
sufficiently direct consequence test 6.10, 6.23
umbrella pricing 6.24, 6.37, 6.39–40
and underlying right to damages 2.24, 2.26, 2.54
cellophane fallacy, quantification of damages 14.29
Chatel, L 11.192
civil law, evidence disclosure see evidence disclosure, access to documents, civil law
Clark, S 11.28
class actions
collective action in Member States 11.125, 11.177, 11.178–88, 11.194–200, 11.217
quantification of damages, damage caused by abusive conduct 14.45
US class actions 11.84, 11.85, 11.227–43
collective action 0.16–17, 11.01–272
alternative 11.251
categories 11.14
litigation process impact 11.09–11
multiple claim avoidance 11.12, 11.177
opt-in and opt-out mechanisms 11.05, 11.15–31
opt-in system advantages 11.19–21
opt-in system drawbacks 11.22–4
opt-out mechanisms, ‘internal class conflict’ risks 11.30
opt-out mechanisms, ‘sweetheart settlements’ 11.30
opt-out system advantages 11.25–6
opt-out system drawbacks 11.27–31
as public enforcement complement 11.02–3
Spain 11.218–22
unclaimed damages 11.21, 11.160, 11.163, 11.225
collective action, assignment of claims 11.244–72
as alternative to collective redress 11.251
EU law 11.254–9
EU law, economies of scale 11.248
EU Law, evidence restrictions 11.255, 11.257–8
national law 11.260–72
national law, Germany 11.261–7
national law, Netherlands 11.268–72
national law, Netherlands, passing-on defence 11.272
terms of assignment 11.249–50
collective action at EU level 11.32–114
data protection rules 11.77
and enforcement of substantive rights 11.40–47
EU law 11.32–77
individual standing 11.44–7
collective action at EU level, consumer protection 11.49–55
intellectual property rights 11.56–7
widespread infringement concept 11.52–5
collective action at EU level, environmental liability 11.58–76
acts and omissions by private persons 11.71–6
qualified entities 11.50, 11.70, 11.86, 11.89, 11.91–2
‘sufficient interest’ and ‘impairment of a right’ conditions 11.59–70, 11.74
collective action at EU level, policy developments 11.78–114
claimants’ eligibility conditions 11.101–3
Commission’s 2011 consultation paper 11.95–8
Commission’s 2013 collective redress initiative 11.99–110
Commission’s joint information note 11.93–4
contingency fees 11.105
cross-border collective redress 11.102
damages distribution issues 11.87
double compensation avoidance 11.87
draft Directive, Commission 0.16, 2.76, 2.81, 2.85, 3.30, 3.47, 3.53, 9.01, 9.03, 11.03, 11.87, 11.89–92
Green Paper 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79, 3.29, 7.74, 8.53, 11.82–4, 12.138, 13.04, 13.09
group actions 11.89–90
individual consumers and SMEs 11.86
limitation periods and access to damages 11.107
‘loser pays’ principle 11.104
opt-in collective actions 11.86
‘opt-in’ principle 11.104
passing-on defence 11.113–14
proposal and Directive 11.111–14
public enforcement proceedings 11.106–7
representative actions and opt-out model 11.92
representative actions and qualified entities 11.89, 11.91–2
US class action comparison 11.84, 11.85
White Paper 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79–81, 2.85, 3.47–8, 8.08, 9.113, 11.85–8, 11.250
collective action in Member States 11.115–226
collective action in Member States, England and Wales 11.116–73
BIS (2012) consultation and 2013 BIS response 11.141–51
businesses and consumers, actions on behalf of both 11.142–3
collective proceedings in practice 11.164–73
Collective Settlement Approval Order (CSAO) 11.161
collective settlement regime in the CAT 11.154–73
collective settlement regime in the CAT, authorisation of the class representative 11.155–6
collective settlement regime in the CAT, eligibility of claims 11.157–9
Competition Act (prior to 1 October 2015), Section 47B 11.127–34
competition-based actions and ‘same interest’ test 11.119–21
Consumer Rights Act (2015) 11.152–3
damages and costs 11.162–3
DTI consultation (2006) and consumer protection 11.136–8
Group Litigation Orders (GLOs) 11.124–6
Group Litigation Orders (GLOs), class action comparison 11.125
‘loser pays’ rule 11.148, 11.159, 11.162, 14.45
naming claimants on claim form 11.134
OFT recommendations (2007) and consumer protection 11.139–40
opt-in actions 11.117
opt-in and opt-out actions 11.144–6, 11.158–9
and opt-out collective action 11.133–4, 11.140, 11.147–51
pre-damages opt-in 11.144–6
private bodies, actions brought by 11.147
regime reform 11.135–51
representative actions 11.119–23, 11.138
stand-alone and follow-on cases 11.142–3
collective action in Member States, France, Consumer Code 11.189–200
class actions and loi Hamon11.194–200
joint representation actions 11.189–93
leniency applicants 11.199
stand-alone class actions 11.198
collective action in Member States, Germany 11.29, 11.201–4
bundling of proceedings 11.204
representative actions 11.202–3
collective action in Member States, Italy 11.214–17
class actions 11.217
Consumer Code 11.214–15
collective action in Member States, Netherlands 11.174–88
and Amsterdam Court of Appeal jurisdiction 11.181, 11.184
bundled claims 11.187–8
foundation or association requirements 11.175–7, 11.188
opt-out class-action mechanism 11.177, 11.178–88
Wet Collectieve Afhandeling Massaschade (WCAM) (2005) 11.176, 11.178–88
collective action in Member States, Portugal 11.223–6
follow-on cases 11.226
opt-out regime 11.223
right of initiative requirements 11.224
collective action in Member States, Spain 11.218–22
identifiable or easily identifiable consumers 11.218–19
opt-in to follow-on action 11.221
representative action 11.220
collective action in Member States, Sweden, class actions 11.205–13
Competition Damages Act 11.212–13
opt-in solutions 11.207
private action 11.211
public action 11.208–9
representative action 11.210
collective action, US class actions 11.227–43
Class Action Fairness Act (2005) 11.239–43
class certification issues 11.242
common-question actions 11.236–7
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), Rule 2311.228–38
‘inconsistent or varying adjudications’ of separate actions 11.230, 11.235
opt-out opportunities 11.233, 11.236–8
representative actions 11.234
Combe, E 14.19
commitment decisions, Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1/20034.117, 4.118, 5.09–12, 5.72, 5.73
common law discovery procedure see evidence disclosure, access to documents, common law discovery procedure
common law principle of antitrust injury 2.18–21
comparator-based methods, quantification of damages 14.98–100
competition-based litigation, and Rome II Regulation see applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation
complements, producers of 14.21, 14.33
compounding and discounting, quantification of damages 14.119–23
conditio sine qua non approach, causation of infringements 6.03–6, 6.20
connected but not identical actions, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, lis pendens rule 12.118–21
consolidation of claims, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 see jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), consolidation of claims (Article 8(1))
consumer protection
collective action in Member States 11.136–40, 11.152–3, 11.214–15, 11.218–19
EU collective action see collective action at EU level, consumer protection
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.162
contingency fees, collective action at EU level 11.105
‘continuous or repeated’ infringement, limitation periods 9.01, 9.10
contractual relationship
causation of infringements 6.10, 6.19
underlying right to damages 2.22–3, 2.52–62
contribution claim
evidence disclosure 4.140
joint and several liability 8.47–51, 8.62
Cooper, E 11.11
cooperative games theory, quantification of damages 14.116–17
cost-based and profitability-based approaches, quantification of damages 14.88–92, 14.96
counterfactual scenario, quantification of damages 14.09, 14.11, 14.56, 14.57, 14.61, 14.62, 14.67, 14.72, 14.79–80, 14.93–102, 14.112
Court of Justice of the European Union
Aalborg Portland v Commission7.85
Adams v Commission5.91
AEG Telefunken v Commission8.03
AFCon Management Consultants9.122
AGC Glass5.100
Ahlström Osakeyhtiö v Commission13.01
Airtours v Commission14.14
Akzo v Commission4.76, 5.91, 5.96, 5.98, 5.99, 5.101, 5.102, 5.120, 8.02, 8.22–3
Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v SpA San Giorgio1.06
Archer Daniels7.85
AssiDomän9.19
Bank Austria Creditanstalt v Commission5.91, 5.99
Banks v British Coal2.01, 2.74, 3.16, 3.59, 3.62, 7.01
Bertelsmann and Sony v Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association (Impala)14.14
Bier v Mines de Potasse d’Alsace12.51, 12.54–63, 12.66–7, 13.40–41
Brasserie du Pêcheur1.06, 1.07, 1.11, 1.14, 2.71, 2.79, 6.11
BRT v SABAM1.07
Camar2.72
CDC Hydrogen Peroxide v Akzo Nobel2.01, 2.57–61, 4.71–6, 11.244–7, 11.256, 12.19–39, 12.40, 12.54, 12.56, 12.59–60, 12.62, 12.76–80, 12.83–5, 12.99
CIF v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato7.20
Commission and France v Ladbroke Racing7.20
Commission v Agrofert Holding4.86
Commission v Éditions Odile Jacob4.86
Commission v Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau4.91
Crehan0.14, 1.03, 1.06, 2.01–24, 2.84, 3.12, 3.15–16, 3.35, 3.36, 3.74, 3.79, 6.12, 6.26, 11.47
Crehan, underlying right to damages see damages, underlying right to, Crehan case
Defrenne v Sabena1.09
Delimitis v Henninger Bräu2.12
Donau Chemie2.28, 4.92–7, 4.103, 4.114, 4.127–9, 6.26, 7.38
Drouot12.106, 12.108, 12.109, 12.110
Dumez France v Hessische Landesbank12.58
Dyestuffs13.18
Eco Swiss3.06
eDate Advertising12.58
EnBW Energie4.71, 4.77–83, 4.88–9, 4.96
Evonik Degussa v Commission4.76, 5.91, 5.98, 5.99, 5.104, 5.108, 5.110–13
Factortame III1.06
Fantask v Industriministeriet1.06
First and Franex4.107
flyLAL-Lithuanian Airlines2.59–60, 12.54
Folien Fischer and Fofitec v Ritrama12.69–73
Francovich v Italian Republic1.06, 1.11, 1.14, 1.15, 1.16, 2.06, 2.07, 6.11, 6.14
Freeport12.80
Gas Insulated Switchgear4.77, 4.136
Greenpeace11.35
Grifoni v EAEC9.116
Gubisch Maschinenfabrik v Palumbo12.120
Hoffmann v Krieg12.115, 12.131
Homawoo v GMF Assurances13.05
ICI v Commission13.18
Ireks-Arkady3.17–18, 3.21, 3.35, 3.43
Irimie9.116
Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary1.12
Just v Danish Ministry for Fiscal Affairs1.06, 3.16, 3.19–22, 3.35
Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schröder12.74
Kone2.28, 3.05, 3.98, 6.19–30, 6.37, 6.39–40
Laboratoires Boiron v Urssaf de Lyon4.57
Land Berlin v Ellen Mirjam Sapir12.12
Littlewoods9.123–5
Manfredi v Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni1.04, 2.09, 2.25–8, 2.84, 3.10, 3.15, 3.79, 6.12, 6.13, 6.17, 7.01, 7.05, 7.11, 7.57, 7.73, 7.76, 7.78, 9.01–2, 9.10, 9.108–9, 9.113, 11.47
Marinari v Lloyds Bank12.58
Marshall II1.01, 9.109–10, 9.113–15
MasterCard v Commission4.68
Masterfoods5.03, 5.14, 5.27, 7.89–90
Michailidis3.16, 3.21, 3.26, 3.59
Netherlands v Commission4.71, 4.84–91, 4.94
Netherlands v Ruffer12.58
Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund11.37–8
Otis2.27, 2.84, 5.06, 5.08, 5.23, 6.14, 6.26
Overseas Union Insurance v New Hampshire Insurance12.122
Owens Bank v Bracco12.131, 12.132, 12.134–5
Owusu12.07
Pergan Hilfsstoffe4.147–8, 5.96, 5.132
Pfleiderer2.27, 4.92, 4.96, 4.98–105, 4.114, 4.122–4, 4.127–9, 4.137–9, 4.145, 4.148, 4.153–4, 4.190, 5.109, 6.26, 10.06
Postbank4.107
Powell Duffryn12.23
ProRail v Xpedys4.36
R v Secretary of State for Transport (Factortame I)1.06
Rewe-Zentralfinanz and Rewe-Zentral v Landwirtschaftskammer für das Saarland1.01
San Giorgio3.16, 3.28, 3.40, 3.43, 3.60
Schenker4.134
Shevill12.52–3, 12.54–63, 13.39–42
Société Comateb1.06, 3.16, 3.21, 3.24–5, 3.59
Steenhorst-Neerings1.01
Sumitomo Chemical5.132
Sutton1.01
The Tatry12.73, 12.104, 12.108, 12.110, 12.113, 12.115, 12.121, 12.131
Toshiba7.86
UGIC v Group Josi12.14
Unectef v Heylens1.12
Van Gend en Loos0.05, 1.15, 1.16
Weber’s Wine World3.21, 3.24, 3.25, 3.26–7, 3.41, 3.42, 3.44–5
Zwartveld4.107
Crane, D 0.06
data protection rules, collective action at EU level 11.77
Davis, J 11.10
Davis, P 14.61
De Jong, J 11.182
De la Mare, T 9.27
De Leeuw, M 4.67
de minimus test 13.17
dead weight loss (DWL), quantification of damages 14.10, 14.11
decentralisation of enforcement of EU competition law 0.08, 5.128
‘decisive influence’ test, attribution of responsibility 8.03, 8.14, 8.22
Dehez, P 14.116
Delatre, J 11.30
Deutlmoser, R 11.201
Dickinson, A 13.40
difference-in-differences analysis, quantification of damages 14.60, 14.81–5, 14.96
direct injury requirement, underlying right to damages 2.24
‘direct and substantial effect’ test 13.15–18, 13.19, 13.29
disclosure of evidence see evidence disclosure
discounting damages, quantification of damages 14.119–23
double compensation avoidance 11.87
draft Directive, Commission 0.16, 2.76, 2.81, 2.85, 3.30, 3.47, 3.53, 9.01, 9.03, 11.03, 11.87, 11.89–92
economic loss, price effect and direct economic loss, indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.10, 3.28, 3.105
economic succession doctrine
attribution of responsibility, EU law 8.04
attribution of responsibility, national law 8.15
effectiveness principle see equivalence and effectiveness principles
effects-based approach, applicable law choice see applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation, effects-based approach (Article 6(3)(a))
Eilmansberger, T 1.14
England and Wales
access to documents and French blocking statute 4.38–47
BIS (2012) consultation and 2013 BIS response 11.141–51
causation of infringements 6.32–3
Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 8.48
collective action see collective action in Member States, England and Wales
Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) 2.32, 3.75, 3.80, 3.82, 5.40–55, 6.32–3, 7.93–8, 9.25–33, 9.36, 10.18–19, 11.116–18, 11.130–31, 11.154–73
conduct calculated to make a profit which may well exceed the compensation payable 7.82–3, 7.86, 7.94
consolidation of claims 12.87–97
Consumer Rights Act 5.41, 9.25, 10.19, 11.152–3
Damages Act 3.83–6
disclosure rules and Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) 4.13, 4.15
DTI consultation (2006) and consumer protection 11.136–8
Enterprise Act 11.116, 11.126–7
evidence disclosure 4.136–49
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.13–19, 5.40–55
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, deference to previous decisions 5.14–17
follow-on damages 9.32
founding jurisdiction in tortious actions 12.64–8
Group Litigation Orders (GLOs) 11.124–6
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.75–86
joint and several liability 8.48
leniency documents 4.138, 4.140–41, 4.144, 7.87, 7.95
limitation periods 9.06, 9.18, 9.25–36
lis pendens rule 12.129–35
ne bis in idem (double jeopardy) principle 7.84–7, 7.88–9, 7.94
OFT recommendations (2007) and consumer protection 11.139–40
opt-out collective actions 10.19
presumption of harm 7.33
proportionality principle and evidence disclosure 4.139–41, 4.149
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.18–19
quantification of loss 7.55–7
and restitutionary damages 7.90
underlying right to damages 2.30–33, 2.63
England and Wales, cases
Albion Water v D.r Cymru Cyfyngedig7.98–102
Arcadia Group Brands v Visa9.35
Bord Na Mona5.13, 12.64–5, 12.97
Cardiff Bus6.32, 7.91–7, 7.101
Consumers Association v JJB Sports11.128–34, 11.193
Cooper Tire & Rubber3.81, 8.06, 12.61, 12.67, 12.69, 12.90, 12.93, 12.96, 12.108, 12.109, 12.110, 12.131–5, 12.139–40, 13.15
Courage Ltd v Crehan2.13
Crehan2.11–14, 2.29, 5.14–18, 7.55–7
Davies v Swan Motor Co8.48
Deutsche Bahn9.18, 9.31–2, 10.06, 12.66
Dubai Aluminium v Salaam8.48
Emerald Supplies v British Airways2.33, 4.148, 11.120–23
Emerson Electric v Morgan Crucible5.51–5, 9.30–31
Enron II6.32–3
Ferrexpo v Gilson Investments12.135
Garden Cottage Foods2.31
Gibson v Pride Mobility Products11.166–71
Healthcare at Home v Genzyme6.32
Infederation Limited v Google5.22
JJB Sports and Allsports v Office of Fair Trading11.130
Kolden Holdings v Rodette Commerce12.108, 12.109
Kuddus v Chief Constable of Leicestershire7.72
MasterCard5.19
Merricks v MasterCard11.172
Microsoft Mobile v Sony Europe12, 42
National Grid4.38–47, 4.98, 4.124, 4.136–45, 4.149, 10.06
Nomura International v Banca MonteDei Paschi Di Siena12.135
Pan Atlantic Insurance v Pine Top Insurance11.122
Peugeot Citroen Automobiles UK v Pilkington Group9.36
Prentice v DaimlerChrysler11.126
‘Price fixing in Toys’ cartel case 11.23
Provimi2.54, 8.14, 12.18, 12.68, 12.87–91, 12.94–6, 12.116, 12.131
Rookes v Barnard 794, 7.80
Sainsbury’s Supermarkets v MasterCard3.75–7, 3.82, 3.86, 10.19
Tesco v MasterCard3.78
Toshiba Carrier12.93
UBS v Regione Calabria12.135
Umbro Holdings, Manchester United, Allsports, JJB Sports v Office of Fair Trading11.130
environmental liability, collective action at EU level see collective action at EU level, environmental liability
equivalence and effectiveness principles 1.04, 2.82–3, 3.10, 4.129, 6.16, 7.38, 8.35, 9.23, 9.109, 9.124–5
estimation of share of overcharge, indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.63–70
European Commission
attribution of responsibility see attribution of responsibility, EU law
causation of infringements 6.09–11, 6.10, 6.12–30
collective action see collective action at EU level
draft Directive 0.16, 2.76, 2.81, 2.85, 3.30, 3.47, 3.53, 9.01, 9.03, 11.03, 11.87, 11.89–92
evidence disclosure see evidence disclosure
evidential value see evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, Commission decisions: Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003
exemplary (punitive) damages 7.73–8
Green Paper 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79, 3.29, 7.74, 8.53, 11.82–4, 12.138, 13.04, 13.09
interest provisions see interest provisions, EU law
IPRs Directive 5.124–5
joint and several liability see joint and several liability, EU law
Late Payment Directive 9.118–20
limitation periods see limitation periods, EU law
private enforcement initiative 0.15–25
Product Liability Directive 2.75
quantification of loss 7.51–4
Regulation (EC) No 44/20012.60, 3.68, 4.88, 4.100, 4.110, 4.117–18, 4.131, 12.04, 12.06, 12.138–40
Regulation (EC) No 1049/20014.68
Regulation (EC) No 1206/20014.35
Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 see Regulation (EC) No 1/2003
Regulation (EC) No 773/20044.62, 4.132, 4.186
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, jurisdictional issues see jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012
scope of damage recoverable 7.01–7
underlying right to damages 2.01–14, 2.25–8
White Paper 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79–81, 2.85, 3.47–8, 8.08, 9.113, 11.85–8, 11.250
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, right to a fair trial 1.12
European Court of Human Rights
Gorraiz Lizarraga v Spain11.32
Lithgow v United Kingdom11.32
Pressos Compania Naviera v Belgium11.259
evidence disclosure 4.01–191
evidence held by a party or third party 4.01–61
evidential value of public enforcement decisions 4.05–7
‘follow-on’ actions 4.05–7
settlement programme 4.03
evidence disclosure, access to documents, civil law 4.18–34
access to probative documents after initiation of proceedings 4.21–34
access to probative documents prior to initiation of proceedings 4.20
burden of proof 4.19, 4.33, 4.34
disclosure restrictions 4.23, 4.26, 4.31
Evidence Regulation, access under 4.35–47
expert witnesses 4.22
evidence disclosure, access to documents, common law discovery procedure 4.12–17
access to documents held by third parties 4.15–17
discovery tradition 4.12–13, 4.27, 4.29, 4.48, 4.55
fishing expeditions 4.54
evidence disclosure, access to documents, Directive rules
disclosure of evidence held by a party or a third party 4.48–61
discretion for national court to order disclosure 4.57–60
proportionality test 4.53–4
relevance requirement 4.51–2, 4.56
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority 4.62–191
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file 4.62–97
application under the Access to Documents Regulation 4.67–97
application under the Access to Documents Regulation, exceptions 4.69–97
application under the Access to Documents Regulation, review obligation 4.82
cartel damages actions 4.71–97, 4.98–105
legal framework 4.62–6
leniency programmes 4.69–70, 4.74, 4.76–7, 4.80–81, 4.86, 4.88, 4.92
public interest in disclosure 4.70, 4.78, 4.88, 4.91, 4.95
restrictions 4.62–3
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA 4.98–191
Commission’s attempts to limit discoverability in US courts, and leniency programmes 4.183, 4.186, 4.189
contribution claim 4.140
Directive Article 6(5) 4.117, 4.119, 4.127, 4.133–5
Directive Article 6(5), non-appealing infringers 4.134–5
equivalence and effectiveness principles 4.129
EU courts 4.98–105
leniency documents 4.99–100, 4.104–5, 4.108, 4.114, 4.116, 4.120–23, 4.126–7, 4.130, 4.183, 4.186, 4.189
national court request under Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/20034.131
pre-existing information 4.122–4
proceeding closed by means of a commitment decision 4.117–18
rules introduced by Directive 4.106–35
settlement decisions taken in accordance with Article 10a of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 4.132
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA, national law 4.136–91
Finland 4.158
Italy 4.179–81
Italy, suspension of the civil proceedings 4.181
Lithuania 4.159–60
Netherlands 4.157
Portugal 4.182
US, Commission’s attempts to limit discoverability in US courts 4.183–91
US, Commission’s attempts to limit discoverability in US courts, comity arguments 4.187–9
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA, national law, England and Wales 4.136–49
legitimate expectations and proportionality principle 4.139–41, 4.149
leniency documents 4.138, 4.140–41, 4.144
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA, national law, France 4.161–78
Directive implementation effects 4.167–8
information prepared for competition authority 4.178
leniency documents 4.169–70
settlement and commitment proceedings 4.171–7
evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA, national law, Germany 4.150–56
exceptions 4.151–3
leniency documents 4.152–5
evidence disclosure, publication of information relating to an infringement by the Commission or an NCA 5.88–133
evidence disclosure, publication of information relating to an infringement by the Commission or an NCA, Commission decisions 5.88–117
leniency materials protection 5.97–105
leniency materials protection, principles of legitimate expectations 5.113
leniency materials protection, risk of being held liable in civil proceedings 5.99–100, 5.109–12
public interest considerations 5.98, 5.102–4
relevant provisions of Directive 5.114–17
relevant provisions of Directive, exemptions for leniency statements 5.116–17
specific protection under Commission’s leniency Notice 5.106–13
summary publication and Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.1035.89–90
undertakings protection, ‘business secrets’ and ‘professional secrecy 5.88, 5.91–6, 5.97, 5.102
evidence disclosure, publication of information relating to an infringement by the Commission or an NCA, NCA decisions 5.118–33
Austria 5.129–33
and IPRs Directive 5.124–5
policy objective of increased decentralisation of the enforcement of EU competition law 0.08, 5.128
publication of information specific to individual participants 5.123–7, 5.131–3
evidence restrictions, collective action, assignment of claims 11.255, 11.257–8
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.01–87
Commission infringement decisions binding on national courts 5.04–7
NCA decisions: Article 9 of the Directive 5.27–37
NCA decisions: Article 9 of the Directive, final decisions 5.30–32
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, Commission decisions: Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1/20035.02–26
commitment decisions 4.117, 4.118, 5.09–12, 5.72, 5.73
and national courts 5.13–37
and national courts, England and Wales 5.13–19
and national courts, England and Wales, deference to previous decisions 5.14–17
and national courts, Netherlands 5.20–23
and national courts, Portugal 5.24–6
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, NCA decisions, evidential value in national law 5.38–87
Austria 5.62
England and Wales, Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) 5.40–55
England and Wales, precise identity of the parties on whom administrative decisions are binding 5.49–55
Finland 5.64
France 5.71–4
Germany 5.56–61
Italy 5.75–81
Italy, judicial review 5.77
Italy, limit to binding nature of administrative decisions 5.81
Latvia 5.65–7
Lithuania 5.68–70
Netherlands 5.63
Portugal 5–85–7
Spain 5.82–4
exclusionary abuse, quantification of damages see quantification of damages, abusive behaviour and damage estimation, exclusionary abuse
‘excusable error’ rule suggestion, damages, underlying right to 2.77–8, 2.81
exemplary (punitive) damages 7.72–102
EU law 7.73–8
exemplary (punitive) damages, national law 7.79–102
Germany 7.79
exemplary (punitive) damages, national law, England and Wales 7.80–102
conduct calculated to make a profit which may well exceed the compensation payable 7.82–3, 7.86, 7.94
exceptional circumstances 7.80
identity of interest 7.86, 7.94
leniency programmes 7.87, 7.95
ne bis in idem (double jeopardy) principle 7.84–7, 7.88–9, 7.94
and restitutionary damages 7.90
expert witnesses, evidence disclosure 4.22
exploitative abuse 14.51–4, 14.94–6
fair trial right 1.12–13
Fallon, M 2.53
fault requirement 2.63–85, 8.19–20
Ferey, S 14.116
Finland
access to documents 4.26
antitrust damages claims 2.68
attribution of responsibility 8.28–37
Competition Damages Act 5.64, 7.41–2, 8.29, 8.86–7, 9.62–3, 9.129–30, 10.22
economic succession doctrine 8.29–31, 8.33–7
effectiveness and equivalence principles 8.35
evidence disclosure 4.158
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.64
Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (FCCA) 4.158, 9.62, 10.22–3
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.141–2
interest provisions 9.106, 9.129–31
joint and several liability 8.85–7
liability for damages through causal connection 8.28
limitation periods 9.57–63
parental liability 8.30–33
presumption of harm 7.41–2
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.22–3
time-barred liability 8.86
Finland, cases
Asphalt Cartel4.158, 5.64, 7.42, 8.30–37, 8.85, 8.87, 9.106, 9.129, 9.130
Car Spare Parts Cartel3.142, 5.64, 7.42
CDC Hydrogen Peroxide Cartel Damage Claims v Kemira Oyj12.42, 12.43–4
Radio Nova v Gramex7.42
Timber Cartel7.42
fishing expeditions, evidence disclosure 4.54
follow-on actions
collective action in Member States 11.142–3, 11.226
evidence disclosure 4.05–7
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.148–9
and limitation periods 9.05, 9.09, 9.11–13, 9.32, 9.83–7, 9.96
quantification of damages 14.109–14
see also stand-alone actions
foreseeability test 6.23–4, 12.25, 12.32–9, 13.15
forum shopping 9.117, 12.10, 12.68, 12.95, 12.102, 12.139, 13.15
founding jurisdictions in tortious action, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 see jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), founding jurisdiction in tortious actions (Article 7(2))
France
access to documents 4.19, 4.38–42
annulment cases 9.82
antitrust damages actions 2.44–6, 2.64–5
class actions and loi Hamon11.194–200
collective action 11.189–200
Consumer Code 3.162, 11.189–200
evidence disclosure 4.161–78
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.71–4
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.144–51
joint representation actions 11.189–93
joint and several liability 8.49
leniency documents 4.169–70, 11.199
limitation periods 9.81–92
presumption of harm 7.44
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.28–34
scope of damage recoverable 7.09
stand-alone class actions 11.198
starting-point in follow-on damage claims 9.83–7
underlying right to damages 2.44–6, 2.64–5
France, cases
Ajinomoto Eurolysine3.22, 3.145–7, 3.150, 7.09
DKT International4.175–7, 5.73, 7.09, 7.44, 10.32
Eco-emballage4.176
Les Sociétés Coopérative Le Gouessant et Sofral3.148
Lycées d’île de France9.84, 9.89
Orange Caraibes 10.71
Outremer telecom4.164
‘Que Choisir/mobile phone operators’ case 11.190–93
SARL Philippe Streiff Motorsport/SAS Speedy2.64
SAS Ma Liste de Courses/Société High4.165
Semavem4.163
UGAP/CAMIF10.28
full compensation principle 3.38–9, 7.04–13, 9.110
Fumagalli, C 14.103, 14.108, 14.128
Garcés, E 14.61
Gateau, C 11.193
Geradin, D 4.191
Germany
access to documents 4.24–5
antitrust damages claims 2.34–40
attribution of responsibility 8.16–21
bundling of proceedings 11.204
causation of infringements 6.34
Civil Code 2.37, 2.40, 2.66–7, 3.91, 3.102, 7.08, 8.20, 8.76, 9.42–4, 9.47, 9.126, 11.264
Code of Civil Procedure 2.36
collective action 11.29, 11.201–4, 11.261–7
evidence disclosure 4.150–56
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.56–61
exemplary (punitive) damages 7.79
in personam liability 8.21
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.87–105, 3.116–17
interest provisions 9.126
joint and several liability 8.76–9
leniency documents 4.152–5
liability requiring fault 8.19–20
limitation periods 9.37–47
negligent ignorance cases 9.41
parent company and subsidiary as separate legal entities 8.17–18
presumption of harm 7.34–6
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.20
quantification of loss 7.58–65
representative actions 11.202–3
restitution on grounds of unjust enrichment 9.47
scope of damage recoverable 7.08
umbrella purchasers 3.97–100
underlying right to damages 2.34–40, 2.66–70
undertaking concept 8.17–19
Germany, cases
Aufzugskartell8.17
Autoglas-Kartell3.89, 3.95, 3.96, 4.25, 5.58, 7.35
Badarmaturen8.21
Berliner Transportbeton7.35
CDC/Dyckerhoff11.261–7, 12.42, 12.85
Dornbracht8.21
Einsicht in Strafakten4.155
Fernsehwerbezeiten5.59
Grauzementkartell5.61, 7.35, 7.64, 7.65, 8.76, 8.78, 8.79, 9.36, 9.44
Kaffeeröster4.152
Lottoblock II5.60, 7.62, 7.63, 7.65, 8.76
ORWI3.89–91, 3.104, 3.116, 3.122, 7.65
Schadenersatzpflicht der Lottogesellschaft5.59, 7.58, 7.59, 7.62, 7.63
Schadensersatz in Altfällen7.35, 8.17
Schienenfreunde3.97, 3.100, 3.105, 5.61, 7.35, 8.21, 9.126
Schutznorm2.15, 2.17, 6.23, 6.25, 6.29–30
Selbstdurchschreibepapier7.64
Versicherungsfusion8.18
Vitaminpreise Dortmund5.57, 7.64
Zementkartell7.58, 9.44, 9.47, 11.264, 11.269
Goldberg, P 3.178
Grafunder, R 4.132
Green, E 14.48
Green Paper, Commission 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79, 3.29, 7.74, 8.53, 11.82–4, 12.138, 13.04, 13.09
Gregory, A 14.91
Griffin, J 14.19
group actions 11.89–90, 11.124–6
see also collective action
Gujarati, D 14.125
Hamilton, J 14.63
harmonisation of remedies 1.10, 1.17–18
Harris, C 11.28
Haus, F 8.17, 8.18, 8.19, 11.204
Heim, L 8.19
Heinichen, C 4.155
Hellwig, M 14.36
Hess, B 13.42
Holmes, M 11.126
Hovenkamp, H 11.07
Hungary
NCA decisions, evidential value 5.39
presumption of harm 7.49–50
Hüschelrath, K 14.125
illegally-charged levies 3.19–27, 9.123–5
‘impairment of a right’ condition, collective action at EU level 11.59–70, 11.74
in personam liability 8.21, 8.27
‘inconsistent or varying adjudications’ of separate actions 11.230, 11.235
Inderst, R 3.99, 14.14, 14.29, 14.87, 14.124
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.01–191
balance of probabilities test 3.41, 3.82
bundling of claims 3.66–70
burden of proof 3.40–52, 3.56, 3.82, 3.84–5, 3.93, 3.94–6, 3.161
effectiveness principle 3.10
full compensation principle 3.38–9
harm in antitrust legislation 3.04–11
indirect purchaser standing 3.12–14, 3.56–7, 3.92, 3.94–6
loss types 3.07–8
lost sales effect 3.07–10, 3.22–30
national courts’ estimation of share of overcharge 3.63–70
own fault concept 3.101–2
partial passing-on and supply chain levels 3.05, 3.59–72, 3.158–61, 3.183
passing-on defence 3.15–72, 3.85
passing-on defence, Article 340(2) TFEU 3.17–18
passing-on defence, recovery of illegally-levied duties 3.19–27
presumption of harm 3.58
presumption of passing-on 3.53–8
price effect and direct economic loss 3.10, 3.28, 3.105
profits adjustment 3.116–17
proving passing-on as defence 3.46–9
proving passing-on offensively 3.50–52
Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and burden of proof 3.51–2
social losses 3.08–9
supply chains and ‘umbrella purchasers’ 3.05
unjust enrichment 3.19, 3.21–30, 3.32–9, 3.41, 3.44, 3.59, 3.104, 3.166, 3.182
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on, national law 3.73–191
Austria 3.106–23
Austria, indirect purchaser standing 3.106–11
Austria, passing-on defence 3.112–23
Austria, profits adjustment 3.116–17
Austria, third-party notice 3.109, 3.114, 3.119
England and Wales 3.75–86
England and Wales, Damages Act 3.83–6
England and Wales, indirect purchaser standing 3.75–8
England and Wales, passing-on defence 3.79–86
Finland 3.141–2
France 3.144–51
France, follow-on damages action 3.148–9
Germany 3.87–105
Germany, burden of proof as regards indirect purchaser claims 3.94–6
Germany, indirect purchaser standing 3.87–100
Germany, passing-on 3.95–6
Germany, passing-on defence 3.101–5, 3.116, 3.122
Germany, profits adjustment 3.116–17
Germany, umbrella purchasers 3.97–100
Italy 3.152–62
Italy, consumer protection provisions 3.162
Lithuania 3.143
Netherlands 3.124–40
Netherlands, passing-on defence 3.128–40
Portugal 3.168
Spain 3.163–7
Spain, indirect purchaser standing 3.163–5
Spain, passing-on defence 3.166–7
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on, national law, US 3.169–91
antitrust injury 3.170–71
Class Action Fairness Act 3.191
‘co-conspirator’ exception 3.188
‘cost-plus’ exception 3.187
direct purchaser identification 3.183–4
‘harmonisation’ statutes 3.190
indirect purchaser standing 3.179–84
indirect purchaser standing, efficiency of rule 3.190–91
indirect purchaser standing, exceptions 3.185–9
‘ownership or control’ exception 3.186
passing-on defence 3.172–8, 3.186
unjust enrichment doctrine 3.182
individual participants
collective action at EU level 11.44–7, 11.86
in personam liability 8.21, 8.27
publication of information specific to 5.123–7, 5.131–3
rights protection and interim relief 1.06
underlying right to damages 2.09
infringements, causation of see causation of infringements
innovation effects, damage caused by abusive conduct 14.17
intellectual property rights
collective action at EU level, consumer protection 11.56–7
IPRs Directive 5.124–5
interest, ‘actual loss’ and ‘loss of profit’, plus interest 7.01–13
interest provisions 9.105–34
interest provisions, EU law 9.108–25
and applicable national rules 9.114–15
and equivalence and effectiveness principles 9.109, 9.124–5
forum shopping 9.117
full compensation principle 9.110
Late Payment Directive 9.118–20
non-contractual liability of the Union 9.121–2
period in respect of which interest is due 9.113–16
recovery of illegally-charged levies 9.123–5
interest provisions, national law 9.126–34
Austria 9.127–8
Germany 9.126
Lithuania 9.132–4
intermediary product, quantification of damages 14.37, 14.42
internal class conflict risks, collective action 11.30
Issacharoff, S 11.24
Italy
access to documents and burden of proof 4.32–4
Civil Code 7.13, 7.68, 8.92, 9.94
class actions 11.217
collective action 11.214–17
Consumer Code 3.162, 11.214–15
consumer protection provisions 3.162
evidence disclosure 4.179–81
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.75–81
follow-on actions and consumers or undertakings differences 9.96
Implementing Decree 3.157, 3.160, 4.32, 4.180, 5.76–7, 5.80, 7.13, 7.45–7, 8.92–6, 9.94–5, 10.35–7, 11.216–17
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.152–62
joint and several liability 8.92–7
judicial review, evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.77
limitation periods 9.93–7
presumption of harm 7.45–7
proportionality principle 10.38
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.35–8
quantification of loss 7.67–8
scope of damage recoverable 7.11–13
SME exemption, joint and several liability, national law 8.94–7
Italy, cases
Alitalia/AGCM4.32
Brennercom/Telecom5.78
BT Italia/Vodafone9.96
Comi/Cargest4.33–4
International Broker/Refining Companies3.156
Manfredi7.49
Swiss International Airlines/SEA3.155
Telecom Italia/Albacom5.75
Teleunit/Telecom9.96
Teleunit/Vodafone5.79
Uno Communications/Telecom9.96
VIH/Juventus FC3.153–4
Jakubovic, Z 14.124
Jang, H 14.113
joint representation actions, collective action in Member States 11.189–93
joint and several liability 8.45–97
arbitration clauses, joint and several liability, jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/201212.45
bid-rigging 8.87
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)) 12.61
limitation periods, EU law, exemption for joint and several liability for immunity recipients 9.17–22
quantification of damages, apportionment of damages 14.115–16
related companies, Austria 8.22–6
joint and several liability, EU law 8.46–75
contribution claim (infringers bringing proceedings between themselves) 8.47–51, 8.62
leniency and immunity recipients 8.52–67
leniency and immunity recipients, conditional rebate 8.53
leniency and immunity recipients, imitation periods 8.60
‘relative responsibility’ consideration 8.50, 8.63, 8.76
SME rules 8.68–75
joint and several liability, national law 8.76–97
Austria, advantage for immunity recipients 8.80–84
England and Wales 8.48
Finland 8.85–7
Finland, and causality 8.87
Finland, participation in cartel for entire duration 8.85
Finland, time-barred liability 8.86
France 8.49
Germany 8.76–9
Germany, contesting claimant’s factual statements by means of pleading lack of knowledge 8.78–9
Italy 8.92–7
Italy, immunity recipients 8.96
Italy, SME exemption 8.94–7
Latvia 8.88–91
Jones, A 0.06
judicial cooperation concerns, lex fori approach 13.25–6
jurisdictional issues 12.01–140
court choices 12.08–10
forum shopping 12.10, 12.68, 12.95, 12.102, 12.139
parallel proceedings problems 12.10
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/201212.04–45
application to parties domiciled outside EU 12.11–14
arbitration clauses 12.40–45
arbitration clauses, joint and several liability 12.45
foreseeability test 12.25, 12.32–9
general jurisdiction (Article 4(1)) 12.15–16, 13.13
jurisdiction agreements (Article 25) 12.17–45
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, lis pendens rule 12.102–40
actions between same parties 12.105–10, 12.126–7
application by national courts 12.129–37
application to concurrent litigation brought outside the EU 12.124–8
application to parties domiciled outside the EU 12.122–3
Article 2912.104–11, 12.126–7, 12.136–7, 12.140
Article 30 and related actions 12.112–21, 12.129–35, 12.136–7, 12.139
Article 30 and related actions, irreconcilability for purposes of Article 30(3) 12.115–17
conflicting decisions 12.115–16, 12.119–20, 12.130, 12.139
connected but not identical actions 12.118–21
Dutch authorities on 12.136–7
English authorities on 12.129–35
Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 review 12.138–40
and ‘same cause of action’ 12.103, 12.104, 12.123, 12.125–6
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012
Mosaikbetrachtung problem 12.45
party unaware of infringement 12.20–25, 12.30
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)) 12.46–101
Article 4 general jurisdiction rule 12.47–9
civil claim for damages or restitution based on act giving rise to criminal proceedings 12.47
founding jurisdiction in tortious actions (Article 7(2)) 12.51–73
joint and several liability 12.61
operations of a branch, agency or other establishment 12.47
place of causal event 12.51–3, 12.54–73
unjust enrichment 12.47
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), consolidation of claims (Article 8(1)) 12.74–101, 13.13, 13.14, 13.42
Dutch application 12.98–101
Dutch application, torpedo action 12.100
English authorities on 12.87–97
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), founding jurisdiction in tortious actions (Article 7(2)) 12.51–73
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), consolidation of claims (Article 8(1))
‘same situation of fact’ condition 12.77, 12.83, 12.99
English authorities on, causation interpretation 12.95–6
English authorities on, ‘undertaking’ interpretation 12.89–92
jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, special jurisdiction (Articles 7(2) and 8(1)), founding jurisdiction in tortious actions (Article 7(2))
application of Bier/Shevill jurisprudence to competition-based litigation 12.51, 12.52–3, 12.54–63, 12.66–7, 13.39–42
as basis for torpedo litigation 12.69–73, 12.100, 12.136, 12.140
English authorities on 12.64–8
Kahlenberg, H 8.19
Klumpe, G 8.19
Knigge, A 11.182
Kolay, S 14.113
Könen, D 8.19
Konings, J 14.88
Kötz, H 2.29
Lande, R 7.33, 11.10, 14.18, 14.19
Late Payment Directive 9.118–20
Latvia
attribution of responsibility 8.38–44
Civil Procedure Law 7.71
Competition Council 5.65–6, 8.40–41, 8.88–90, 10.27
economic succession doctrine 8.38, 8.40–41, 8.44
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.65–7
joint and several liability 8.88–91
liability in damages actions 8.42–3
limitation periods 9.77
parental liability 8.38–9
presumption of harm 7.43
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.27
quantification of loss 7.69–71
scope of damage recoverable 7.23–4
undertaking concept 8.38
Latvia, cases
Divions v Udeka and Ventspils7.24, 7.69, 7.71, 8.88–91
KIA Auto8.38
PKL Flote7.23
Lawnicka, D 2.53
legal context 1.01–20
boundary between remedial rules and procedural rules 1.17–18
CJEU remedies case-law 1.01–7
equivalency and effectiveness principles 1.04
harmonisation of remedies 1.10, 1.17–18
individuals’ rights protection and interim relief 1.06
move from rights to remedies 1.08–18
passing-on defence 1.06
procedural autonomy principle 1.08
recovery of damages in cases of breach 1.03
remedies and damages actions application 1.19–20
right of recovery of purchase price on seller (direct right) 1.14–16, 1.19
right to enforce 1.14–16, 1.19
right to a fair trial 1.12–13
Leibenstein, H 14.16
leniency programmes
collective action in Member States 11.199
evidence disclosure see under evidence disclosure
exemplary (punitive) damages 7.87, 7.95
joint and several liability, EU law 8.52–67
materials protection 5.97–105, 5.109–12
Leskinen, C 11.19
Levenstein, M 14.19
lex fori approach see applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation, Article 6(3) and competition-based litigation, lex fori approach
liability
attribution of responsibility see attribution of responsibility
joint and several see joint and several liability
leniency materials protection, risk of being held liable in civil proceedings 5.99–100, 5.109–12
limitation periods 9.01–104
limitation periods and access to damages, collective action at EU level, policy developments 11.107
limitation periods, EU law 9.01–24
‘continuous or repeated’ infringement 9.01, 9.10
effectiveness principle 9.23
exemption for joint and several liability for immunity recipients 9.17–22
follow-on actions and suspension of period 9.05, 9.09, 9.11–13
infringement decision, not all infringers appeal 9.16, 9.16–20
public authority involvement 9.09, 9.11, 9.13, 9.15
‘reasonable and sufficient’ limitation period 9.20
suspension at commencement of dispute resolution process 9.24
limitation periods, national law 9.25–104
Austria 9.48–52
England and Wales 9.06, 9.18, 9.25–36
England and Wales, Competition Appeal Tribunal Rules 2015 transitional provisions 9.25–33, 9.36
England and Wales, extra-territorial effects 9.36
England and Wales, follow-on damages 9.32
Finland 9.57–63
Finland, Limitations Act 9.63
France 9.81–92
France, annulment cases 9.82
France, bid-rigging 9.84
France, interruption of limitation period 9.88–91
France, starting-point in follow-on damage claims 9.83–7
France, suspension of limitation period 9.92
Germany 9.37–47
Germany, negligent ignorance cases 9.41
Germany, restitution on grounds of unjust enrichment 9.47
Germany, suspension grounds 9.43–6
Italy 9.93–7
Italy, follow-on actions and consumers or undertakings differences 9.96
Italy, suspension of limitation period 9.97
Latvia 9.77
Lithuania 9.78–80
Netherlands 9.53–6
Portugal 9.100–104
Spain 9.98–9
Sweden 9.64–76
Sweden, Competition Damages Act 9.74–6
Sweden, competition law 9.69–73
lis pendens rule, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 see jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, lis pendens rule
Lithuania
access to documents 4.27–8, 4.122
Civil Code 9.132–3
Code of Civil Procedure 4.27–8, 4.159, 5.69–70, 7.16, 10.24
evidence disclosure 4.159–60
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.68–70
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.143
interest provisions 9.132–4
Law on Competition 4.159, 9.133, 10.26
limitation periods 9.78–80
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.24–6
scope of damage recoverable 7.14–22
Lithuania, cases
FlyLAL-Lithuanian Airlines v AirBaltic and Airport Riga7.17–22, 12.59
Klevo lapas v Orlen Lietuva5.68
Pienožvaigžde[.]s v Republic of Lithuania9.79
iauliu? tara v Stumbras5.68–9, 7.15–16
‘loser pays’ principle 11.104, 11.148, 11.159, 11.162, 14.45
loss of opportunity 6.32–3, 7.07
lost sales effect, indirect purchaser standing 3.07–10, 3.22–30
Maier-Rigaud, F 3.05, 3.10, 6.35, 6.37, 6.40
market analysis, quantification of damages 14.52, 14.60, 14.77–80, 14.82–3, 14.86–7, 14.94–5, 14.105–6
Marvel, H 14.113
Miller, G 11.24
Mills, D 14.113
Monnier, C 14.19
Mosaikbetrachtung12.45, 13.35–42
Mühlbach, T 3.94, 4.150, 4.155, 8.77
Mulheron, R 11.19, 11.26, 11.123, 11.143
multiple claim avoidance, collective action 11.12, 11.177
Murtagh, M 11.236
Nagy, C 14.45
Napel, S 14.118
national competition authority, evidence disclosure see evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA
national law
applicable national rules, and interest provisions, EU law 9.114–15
application by national courts, jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, lis pendens rule 12.129–37
attribution of responsibility see attribution of responsibility, national law
collective action, assignment of claims 11.260–72
in competition litigation, causation of infringements 6.31–4
damage, presumption of harm see damage, presumption of harm, national law
damages, underlying right to see damages, underlying right to, national law
discretion for national court to order disclosure, evidence disclosure, access to documents, Directive rules 4.57–60
estimation of share of overcharge, indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.63–70
evidence disclosure see evidence disclosure, evidence included in file of competition authority, Commission file or NCA, national law
and evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, Commission decisions: Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1/20035.13–37
exemplary (punitive) damages see damage, exemplary (punitive) damages, national law
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on see indirect purchaser standing and passing-on, national law
interest provisions see interest provisions, national law
joint and several liability see joint and several liability, national law
limitation periods see limitation periods, national law
NCA decisions: Article 9 of the Directive, evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.27–37
NCA decisions: Article 9 of the Directive, final decisions, evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.30–32
provision of remedy in damages for enforcement of rights, damages, underlying right to 2.01–24
and public authorities’ expertise see public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of
quantification of loss see damage, quantification of loss, national law
recoverable damage see damage, scope of damage recoverable, national law
see also individual countries
Nazzini, R 11.06
ne bis in idem (double jeopardy) principle 7.84–7, 7.88–9, 7.94
Neal, P 3.178
negligent ignorance cases, Germany 9.41
Netherlands
access to documents 4.31
Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) 4.157, 5.63, 10.21
Civil Code 3.130, 7.40, 9.53, 11.174–7, 11.187
Code of Civil Procedure 4.31, 5.63, 10.21, 11.184
collective action 1.174–88, 11.181, 11.184
collective action, assignment of claims 11.268–72
consolidation of claims 12.98–101
evidence disclosure 4.157
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.20–23, 5.63
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.124–40
limitation periods 9.53–6
lis pendens rule 12.136–7
opt-out class-action mechanism 11.177, 11.178–88
presumption of harm 7.40
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.21
Wet Collectieve Afhandeling Massaschade (WCAM) (2005) 11.174, 11.176, 11.178–88
Netherlands, cases
candle waxes case 5.20–22, 11.269
Cathode Ray Tubes12.99
Converium11.182–5
Dawn Foods v Südzucker12.136–7
elevators11.270, 12.42, 12.101
Hoge Raad3.136–40
KLM Air Cargo3.127, 5.23, 11.271, 12.100
sodium chlorate12.19, 12.42, 12.98
Niitväli E 11.203
Nordh, R 11.207
nullity sanction 2.08, 2.46, 2.49, 2.54, 2.56
Oldehaver, G 14.118
opt-in and opt-out mechanisms, collective action see under collective action
Osterdahl, I 4.67
outside EU
litigation brought 12.124–8
parties domiciled 12.11–14, 12.122–3
see also place of causal event
overcharge
and indirect purchaser standing see indirect purchaser standing and passing-on
quantification of damages, damage caused by abusive conduct 14.12, 14.18, 14.19, 14.35, 14.37, 14.44
underlying right to damages 2.33, 2.40, 2.51
own fault concept, indirect purchaser standing 3.101–2
parent company and subsidiary as separate legal entities, Germany 8.17–18
parental liability 8.03, 8.30–33, 8.38–9
passing-on
and collective action 11.113–14, 11.272
and indirect purchaser standing see indirect purchaser standing and passing-on
legal context 1.06
Peleg, B 14.116
Peyer, S 0.18
Pischke, J-S 14.81
place of causal event 12.51–3, 12.54–73
see also outside EU
Plender, R 13.18, 13.29, 13.30
Poillot-Peruzzetto, S 2.53
policy developments, collective action, EU see collective action at EU level, policy developments
policy shopping 13.28
Porter, R 14.48
Portugal
access to documents 4.29–30
Civil Code 3.168, 9.101, 9.102
collective action 11.223–6
evidence disclosure 4.182
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5–85–7, 5.24–6
follow-on cases 11.226
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.168
limitation periods 9.100–104
opt-out regime 11.223
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.40
right of initiative requirements 11.224
Portugal, cases
Carrefour3.168
DECO v PT11.225
Franchise de hotelaria3.168
Gas bottles5.25
JCG v Tabaqueira5.85
Leite3.168
Nestlé (III)5.86
OdC v Sport TV11.226
Onitelecom v PT9.103
Reuter4.30
Salvador Caetano3.168
Sociedade Central de Cervejas v Carmo Augusto Nascimento10.40
Sociedade Central de Cervejas v Factorfina10.40
Sport TV4.182
Tabou Calzados3.168
Posner, R 14.18
pre-existing information, evidence disclosure 4.122–4
predatory pricing 7.17, 7.92, 14.48, 14.50, 14.52, 14.103, 14.105–6, 14.110, 14.113
presumption of harm 7.25–50
Finland 7.41–2
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.58
and price effects 7.32
presumption of harm, national law 7.33–50
Austria 7.37–9
England and Wales 7.33
Finland 7.41–2
France 7.44
Germany 7.34–6
Hungary 7.49–50
Italy 7.45–7
Latvia 7.43
Netherlands 7.40
Spain 7.48
price effects
bid-rigging 8.87, 9.84, 14.06, 14.07
damage caused by abusive conduct 14.12–15, 14.18–19, 14.25, 14.28–46
and direct economic loss, indirect purchaser standing 3.10, 3.28, 3.105
presumption of harm 7.32
right of recovery of purchase price 1.14–16, 1.19
prior administrative infringement decisions, evidential value see evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions
private action, collective action 11.71–6, 11.147, 11.211
private enforcement 0.02–3, 0.05–25
Ashurst study 0.15
Barroso II Commission 0.16
collective redress initiative 0.16–17
Commission’s private enforcement initiative 0.15–25
procedural delays 0.21–2
Regulation (EC) No 1/20030.08–9
Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, ‘legal exception’ system 0.09–10
Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, Modernisation and Modernisation II 0.08–13
settlements, lack of reporting on 0.20
see also public enforcement
procedural autonomy principle 1.08
procedural rules, boundary with remedial rules 1.17–18
producers of complements 14.21, 14.33
Product Liability Directive 2.75
professional secrecy 5.88, 5.91–6, 5.97, 5.102
profits
‘actual loss’ and ‘loss of profit’, plus interest 7.01–13
attribution of responsibility 7.82–3, 7.86, 7.94
causation of infringements 6.32
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.116–17
quantification of damages 14.06, 14.88–92, 14.96, 14.105–6, 14.107–8
proportionality principle 4.53–4, 4.139–41, 4.149, 4.182, 10.10–11, 10.15, 10.35, 10.38
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.01–40
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of, EU law 10.01–16
Consultation of the Commission 10.01–13
NCA consultation 10.14–16
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of, national law, NCA consultation 10.17–40
England and Wales 10.18–19
England and Wales, opt-out collective actions 10.19
Finland 10.22–3
France 10.28–34
France, Competition Authority (FCA) intervention 10.28–32
France, intervention of the ministre de l’économie 10.33–4
Germany 10.20
Italy 10.35–8
Italy, proportionality principle 10.38
Latvia 10.27
Lithuania 10.24–6
Netherlands 10.21
Portugal 10.40
Spain 10.39
public authority involvement, limitation periods 9.09, 9.11, 9.13, 9.15
public enforcement 0.04–5, 0.06
collective action 11.02–3, 11.106–7, 11.208–9
complementary role played by private damages actions before national courts 0.11–13
evidential value of 4.05–7
see also private enforcement
public interest considerations, evidence disclosure 4.70, 4.78, 4.88, 4.91, 4.95, 5.98, 5.102–4
publication of information specific to individual participants 5.123–7, 5.131–3
punitive damages see exemplary (punitive) damages
qualified entities, collective action 11.50, 11.70, 11.86, 11.89, 11.91–2
‘qualified entities’ standing, collective action at EU level, environmental liability 11.70
quantification of damages 14.01–137
after-effects, estimation of 14.124–5
compounding and discounting damages 14.119–23
confidence intervals 14.137
estimation problems 14.02
‘relative responsibility’ consideration 14.115
remoteness and causality 14.129–33
statistical methods, accuracy of 14.126–8
statistical methods, accuracy of, practicality concept 14.127
and supply chains 14.05, 14.23
quantification of damages, abusive behaviour and damage estimation 14.93–114
counterfactual scenario 14.93–102, 14.112
exploitative abuse 14.94–6
follow-on suits (phase III) 14.109–14
retroactive discount systems 14.47, 14.52, 14.100, 14.105, 14.113
quantification of damages, abusive behaviour and damage estimation, exclusionary abuse 14.97–114, 14.135–6
comparator-based methods 14.98–100
establishment of ‘in the absence of exclusionary abuse’ 14.100
potential competitors, targeting 14.111
profit losses (phase II) 14.107–8
profit and market share decline 14.105–6
quantification of damages, apportionment 14.115–18
and cooperative games theory 14.116–17
joint and several liability 14.115–16
Shapley value concept 14.117–18
quantification of damages, cartel cases and damage estimation 14.55–92
cost-based and profitability-based approaches 14.88–92, 14.96
counterfactual price estimation 14.56, 14.57, 14.61, 14.62, 14.67, 14.72, 14.79–80
difference-in-differences analysis 14.60, 14.81–5, 14.96
market cross-sectional analysis 14.60, 14.77–80, 14.82–3, 14.94–5
market simulated comparator 14.86–7
time series analysis 14.60, 14.61–76, 14.81, 14.82–3
time series analysis, before-and-after method 14.62–4, 14.67–72, 14.94
time series analysis, composition effects 14.74–6
time series analysis, dummy variable approach 14.65–6, 14.73
time series analysis, forecasting approach 14.67–73
quantification of damages, damage caused by abusive conduct 14.05–53, 14.47–53
cellophane fallacy 14.29
class actions 14.45
counterfactual or but-for scenario 14.09, 14.11
damage types 14.10–19
dead weight loss (DWL) 14.10, 14.11
economic actors damaged by cartels 14.20–36
effects on producers of complements 14.21, 14.33
exclusionary and exploitative abuses 14–48–50, 14.08, 14.47
exploitative and exclusionary conduct 14.51–4
and general equilibrium theory 14.23
horizontal effects 14.21
inefficiencies 14.10, 14.12, 14.15, 14.16–17
innovation effects 14.17
intermediary product 14.37, 14.42
market characteristics, changing 14.17
market entry barriers 14.52
negative externalities and unclaimed damage 14.44–5
overcharge 14.12, 14.18, 14.19, 14.35, 14.37, 14.44
predatory pricing 14.48, 14.50, 14.52, 14.103, 14.105–6, 14.110, 14.113
price effects 14.12–15, 14.18–19, 14.25, 14.28–46
price-fixing or bid-rigging cartels 14.06, 14.07
profit increase goals 14.06
quantity effects 14.07, 14.11–15, 14.18, 14.20, 14.21, 14.24–5, 14.28–46
tying and market power leverage 14.49, 14.100, 14.136
vertical effects 14.21–46
vertical effects, downstream 14.23, 14.27–32, 14.43–4
vertical effects, upstream 14.23, 14.24–6, 14.40
and wealth transfer and welfare losses 14.05, 14.10, 14.11–15
quantification of harm, causation of infringements 6.35–41
quantification of loss 7.51–71
EU law 7.51–4
quantification of loss, national law 7.55–71
Austria 7.66
England and Wales 7.55–7
Germany 7.58–65
Italy 7.67–8
Latvia 7.69–71
recoverable damage 7.01–24
in cases of breach 1.03
EU law 7.01–7
illegally-charged levies 9.123–5
loss of opportunity 6.32–3, 7.07
recoverable damage, national law 7.08–24
Austria 7.10
France 7.09
Germany 7.08
Italy 7.11–13
Latvia 7.23–4
Lithuania 7.14–22
Regulation (EC) No 44/20012.60, 3.68, 4.88, 4.100, 4.110, 4.117–18, 4.131, 12.04, 12.06, 12.138–40
Regulation (EC) No 1049/20014.68
Regulation (EC) No 1206/20014.35
Regulation (EC) No 1/200311.106, 13.01
attribution of responsibility 8.10, 8.17
evidence disclosure 5.27, 5.65, 5.71, 5.88–94, 5.105, 5.128
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions see evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions, Commission decisions: Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.51–2
private enforcement 0.08–13
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.01, 10.04, 10.07, 10.13–14, 10.21, 10.25, 10.34
Regulation (EC) No 773/20044.62, 4.132, 4.186
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, jurisdictional issues see jurisdictional issues, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012
‘relative responsibility’ consideration
joint and several liability 8.50, 8.63, 8.76
quantification of damages 14.115
relevance requirement, evidence disclosure 4.51–2, 4.56
remedial rules, boundary with procedural rules 1.17–18
remedies, move from rights to 1.08–18
remoteness and causality, quantification of damages 14.129–33
representative actions, collective action 11.89, 11.91–2, 11.119–23, 11.138, 11.202–3, 11.210, 11.220, 11.234
responsibility attribution see attribution of responsibility
retroactive discount systems, quantification of damages 14.47, 14.52, 14.100, 14.105, 14.113
Ridyard, D 7.33
right of initiative requirements, Portugal 11.224
right to a fair trial 1.12–13
rights, move from rights to remedies 1.08–18
Röller, L-H 14.61
Rome II Regulation, and applicable law choice see applicable law choice and Rome II Regulation
Rossi, L. 4.29
Rother, C 11.203
Rowe, T 11.236
Saggers, G 14.119
sales, lost sales effect, indirect purchaser standing 3.07–10, 3.22–30
‘same cause of action’, and lis pendens rule 12.103, 12.104, 12.123, 12.125–6
‘same interest’ test, collective action 11.53, 11.55, 11.119–21
sanctions
evidence disclosure, access to documents 4.50, 4.61
nullity to 2.08, 2.46, 2.49, 2.54, 2.56
Savov, V 11.245, 11.247, 11.251, 11.252, 11.253
Schinkel, M 14.36
Schreiber, T 3.65, 11.245, 11.247, 11.249
Schumpeter, J 14.17
Schwalbe, U 14.01–137
secrecy, professional 5.88, 5.91–6, 5.97, 5.102
Seegers, M 8.45, 8.50, 8.58, 8.60, 8.63, 8.94, 11.249
Selten, R 14.110
separate actions
collective action 11.230, 11.235
Regulation (EU) No 1215/201212.59, 12.62
Serafimova, M 8.19
Shapley value concept, quantification of damages 14.117–18
significant responsibility reference, underlying right to damages 2.22, 2.54
SME rules
collective action 11.86
joint and several liability 8.68–75, 8.94–7
Smith, M 11.245
Smuda, F 14.23
social losses
dead weight loss (DWL) 14.10, 14.11
indirect purchaser standing 3.08–9
wealth transfer and welfare losses 14.05, 14.10, 14.11–153
Sousa Ferro, M 2.50, 2.62, 4.29, 11.226, 12.36
Spain
antitrust damages actions 2.47–51
collective action 11.218–22
evidential value of prior administrative infringement decisions 5.82–4
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.163–7
limitation periods 9.98–9
opt-in to follow-on action 11.221
presumption of harm 7.48
public authorities, procedures for national courts’ recourse to expertise of 10.39
representative action 11.220
underlying right to damages 2.47–51
Spain, cases
Audiencia Provincial5.82
Ausbanc v Telefónica Móviles11.220
Céntrica v Iberdrola9.98
EC Copecelt v Cepsa5.82
Football TV rights5.82
Hugo and Prourbal v Repsol5.82
Nestlé v Ebro Foods3.166, 5.82
Repsol v Ribera5.82
Tribunal Supremo5.82
stand-alone actions
collective action 11.142–3, 11.198
see also follow-on actions
subsidiaries, parent company and subsidiary as separate legal entities, Germany 8.17–18
Sudhölter, P. 14.116
‘sufficient interest’ condition, collective action 11.59–70, 11.74
sufficiently direct consequence test, causation of infringements 6.10, 6.23
supply chains
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.05, 3.59–72, 3.158–61, 3.183
and quantification of damages 14.05, 14.23
Suslow, V 14.19
suspension, limitation periods 9.05, 9.09, 9.11–13, 9.24, 9.43–6, 9.92, 9.97
Sweden
class actions 11.205–13
Competition Damages Act 9.74–6, 11.212–13
limitation periods 9.64–76
opt-in solutions 11.207
private action, class actions 11.211
public class actions 11.208–9
quantification of damages loss 7.52
representative action, class actions 11.210
sweetheart settlements, collective action 11.30
Thiede, T 8.19
third parties, and evidence disclosure 4.01–61, 4.15–17, 4.48–61
Thomas, S 3.99
time series analysis, quantification of damages 14.60, 14.61–76, 14.81, 14.82–3
torpedo action 12.69–73, 12.100, 12.136, 12.140
tortious and contractual liability, distinction between 2.52–62
tying agreements 2.11–12, 2.24
market power leverage 14.49, 14.100, 14.136
Tzakas, D-P 11.87
UK, England and Wales see England and Wales
Ulen, T 14.44
umbrella effects
causation of infringements 6.24, 6.37, 6.39–40
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.05, 3.97–100
quantification of damages 14.13, 14.29
unaware, party unaware of infringement 12.20–25, 12.30
unclaimed damages 11.21, 11.160, 11.163, 11.225, 14.44–5
underlying right to damages 2.01–85
breach of statutory duty 2.63
cartelist behaviour 2.33, 2.42
directly effective rights on individuals 2.09
equivalence and effectiveness principles 2.82–3
EU law, establishment as matter of 2.01–14, 2.25–8
‘excusable error’ rule suggestion 2.77–8, 2.81
fault requirement 2.63–85
see also Court of Justice of the European Union, Manfredi v Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni
national courts’ provision of remedy in damages for enforcement of rights 2.01–24
nullity sanction 2.08, 2.46, 2.49, 2.54, 2.56
tortious and contractual liability, distinction between 2.52–62
unjust enrichment claim 2.40, 2.49
underlying right to damages, Crehan case 2.01–24, 2.84
breach of statutory duty argument 2.23, 2.30, 2.33, 2.54
causation issue 2.24, 2.26, 2.54
common law principle of antitrust injury 2.18–21
contractual relationship 2.22–3, 2.56
direct injury requirement 2.24
proceedings before English courts 2.11–14
significant responsibility reference 2.22, 2.54
suitability of case to establish right to damages 2.15–24
see also Court of Justice of the European Union, Crehan
underlying right to damages, national law 2.29–85
Austria 2.41–3
England and Wales 2.30–33, 2.63
Spain 2.47–51
undertaking concept
attribution of responsibility 8.17–19, 8.38
Regulation (EU) No 1215/201212.89–92
undertakings protection, evidence disclosure 5.88, 5.91–6, 5.97, 5.102
unjust enrichment
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on 3.19, 3.21–30, 3.32–9, 3.41, 3.44, 3.59, 3.104, 3.166, 3.182
limitation periods 9.47
Regulation (EU) No 1215/201212.47
underlying right to damages 2.40, 2.49
US
cartel damages and value chain downstream 14.35
Cartwright Act (California) 3.177
Class Action Fairness Act 3.191, 11.239–43
class actions 11.07, 11.84, 11.85, 11.227–43
Commission’s attempts to limit discoverability in US courts 4.183–91
Detroit Automobile Dealers Association (DADA) 14.72
Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (FTAIA) 12.02, 13.21–2
Gulf Coast Claims Facility 11.133
‘harmonisation’ statutes 3.190
indirect purchaser standing and passing-on see indirect purchaser standing and passing-on, national law, US
lex fori approach 13.20–22
passing-on, policy-based approach 3.01–3
private antitrust enforcement 0.06, 0.25, 2.15, 2.18–19
representative actions 11.234
unjust enrichment doctrine 3.182
US, cases
AGC v California State Council of Carpenters2.19, 2.20, 2.24, 3.171, 3.190
In re Air Cargo Shipping Services4.183, 4.190
Alcoa13.22
Atlantic City Electric Company v General Electric Company11.227
Atlantic Richfield v USA Petroleum3.171
Blue Shield of Virginia v McCready3.181
Brunswick Corp. v Peublo Bowl-O-Mat2.15, 3.171
Campos v Ticketmaster3.184
Cargill3.171
Clayworth3.177
County of Suffolk v Long Island Lighting11.235
In re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litigation3.171
In re Flat Glass Antitrust legislation4.183, 4.189
Hanover Shoe v United Shoe Machinery Corp.3.01, 3.22, 3.172–6, 3.178, 3.180, 3.182
Hawaii v Standard Oil Co. of Cal.3.171
Hoffmann-La Roche4.183
Howard Hess Dental Labs v Dentsply International3.184
Illinois Brick Co. v Illinois3.01, 3.181–91
Jewish Hosp. Ass’n v Stewart Mech. Enters.3.186
Kansas v Utilicorp United3.187
In re Lithium Ion Batteries Antitrust Litigation3.190
In re Methionine Antitrust Litigation4.183
Morrison v National Australia Bank11.182
Motorola Mobility v AU Optronics13.22
In re OSB Antitrust Litigation3.187
Paper Systems v Nippon Paper Industries3.188
Paycom Billing Services v MasterCard International3.184
Reilly v Hearst Corp.3.171
In re Rhone-Poulenc Rorer11.28
In re Rubber Chemicals Antitrust Litigation4.183
TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation3.171, 4.183
Tyson Foods v Bouaphakeo11.242
In re Vitamins Antitrust Litigation4.183, 4.185, 4.189
Warren General Hospital v Amgen3.183–4
In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation3.184
Van Gerven, W 1.05, 1.06, 1.17–18, 2.04, 6.10
Van Lith, H 11.178
Van Nuffel, P 2.84, 4.117, 5.34, 5.39, 6.10, 6.27, 6.29, 7.07, 7.77, 8.11, 8.45, 8.60, 8.64, 8.70, 8.71, 8.72, 8.75, 9.01, 9.08, 9.09, 9.10, 9.11, 9.13, 9.22, 10.16, 11.259, 12.94
vertical effects, quantification of damages 14.21–46
Von Bar, C 6.02, 6.05, 6.06, 6.07, 6.20
Wagner-von Papp, F 4.24, 4.48, 4.51, 4.57, 4.128, 4.130, 5.108
Walker, M 14.01
wealth transfer and welfare losses 14.05, 14.10, 14.11–153
see also social losses
Werden, G 14.18
Weston, M 11.201
Whitbeck, J 11.242
White Paper, Commission 0.15, 2.53, 2.77, 2.79–81, 2.85, 3.47–8, 8.08, 9.113, 11.85–8, 11.250
Wilderspin, M 12.89, 13.18, 13.29, 13.30
Wils, W 4.112, 4.128, 4.131, 7.74, 7.84, 7.89, 8.74
Withers, C 12.54
Wooldridge, J 14.79
Young, H 14.116
Zweigert, K 2.29