In the strive towards a highly competitive market, the European Commission has long promoted an extensive use of so-called private enforcement, where individuals claim their rights, as guaranteed by the acquis communautaire, before national courts. The incentive to litigate is, mostly, the right to receive damages for loss suffered due to another private party’s violation of the EU antitrust rules, established by the CJEU in its famous ruling in Courage, in 2001.          Lately, the Commission seems to believe that the aim of a more effective private enforcement of antitrust law justifies rather extensive intrusions into the internal legal systems of the Member States. In a White Paper of 2008, the Commission proposed several measures aimed at enhancing the possibilities for individuals to be awarded with compensation for having suffered from a breach of the antitrust rules. These measures include the harmonization of certain national procedural laws, to facilitate inter alia damages claims at a national level. One year later, in 2009, an internal document with a draft for a directive was leaked out from the Commission, which suggests that there are advanced plans for issuing a harmonizing legislation.          Extensive critique has been aimed at the Commission’s proposal, mainly on the basis that procedural rules should be left unaltered by the European Union. Procedural rules are often considered to be the result of careful considerations of specific domestic characteristics and problems, which over time have resulted in a well-balanced internal system based on legal traditions and culture. Even though national rules would still apply in purely domestic situations, it is said that the internal balance of the national procedural systems would be undermined if certain procedural rules were to be harmonized throughout the Union.          This thesis aims at analysing whether the aim of an effective private enforcement of Union competition law does justify a harmonization of procedural rules that could facilitate inter alia private damage claims before national courts. In the case of a confirmative answer, the work also aims at answering to the question of what form such a harmonization should take: should the Commission initiate a legislative process or should it be left to the CJEU to continue developing the state of law through sporadic rulings on the matter? Recourse is made throughout the work to several important general principles of Union law, such as the principles of national procedural autonomy, subsidiarity, and equality. / I sin strävan efter att åstadkomma en marknad med hög konkurrenskraft har Europeiska kommissionen länge förespråkat ett mer extensivt nyttjande av så kallad private enforcement (ung. privat genomförande) där individer åberopar sina rättigheter, som följer av acquis communataire, inför nationella domstolar. Incitamentet för att driva processer består i dessa fall mestadels av rätten att erhålla skadestånd för den skada som klaganden lidit på grund av en annan privat aktörs brott mot konkurrensreglerna, grundad av EU-domstolen (EUD) i målet Courage, 2001.          På senare tid tycks kommissionen anse att målet med en mer effektiv private enforcement rättfärdigar relativt djupa intrång i medlemsstaternas interna rättssystem. I en Vitbok från 2008 föreslog kommissionen flera medel för att förbättra möjligheterna för individer att erhålla kompensation för skada orsakad av konkurrensöverträdelser. Förslagen skulle innebära en harmonisering av vissa processuella regler för att underlätta bland annat skadeståndstalan på nationell nivå. Ett år efter Vitbokens publicering läckte ett annat dokument ut från kommissionen, innehållande ett utkast på ett direktiv som föreslår liknande regler som Vitboken. Detta tyder på att det finns långt skridna planer för att skapa en harmoniserande lagstiftning på EU-nivå.          Omfattande kritik har riktats mot kommissionens förslag, mestadels på grunden att processuella regler bör undanhållas från Europeiska Unionens inflytande. Processuella regler anses ofta vara en produkt av noggranna överväganden av nationella särdrag och problem, som under tidens gång lett till ett välbalanserat internt system baserat på gamla rättstraditioner och rättskultur. Trots att nationella regler skulle fortsätta att gälla för rent interna situationer, påstås det att den interna balansen inom de nationella processuella systemen skulle undergrävas vid en harmonisering.          Denna magisteruppsats syftar till att analysera huruvida målet med en effektiv private enforcement av Unionens konkurrensregler rättfärdigar en harmonisering av processuella regler, för att underlätta bland annat privata skadeståndstalan i nationella domstolar. Om så visar sig vara fallet skall arbetet även undersöka vilken form en sådan harmonisering borde ta: skall kommissionen initiera en lagstiftningsprocess eller skall det vara upp till EUD att fortsätta utveckla det relevanta rättsläget? Under arbetet används genomgående några viktiga generella EU-rättsliga principer som referensramar. Dessa är bland annat principen om nationell processautonomi, subsidiaritet och likabehandling.

This paper deals with the problematics of private enforcement with main focus on the legislation comprised in the act no. 262/2017 col. on Compensation of Damages in the Area of Competition Law in the context of the evolution of the approach of the European Union and the Czech Republic towards private enforcement. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the impact of the new law on legal status of persons, who have suffered harm caused by competition law infringement, when claiming for compensation for his or hers loss. The author of the paper critically evaluates the way the European law was transposed into the Czech legal environment and its real impact on the legal relationships in the area of private enforcement of competition law. The author examines in detail the newly established framework of limitation periods which differs significantly from those of the general civil law both before and after its recodification. The Act on Compensation of Damages in the Area of Competition Law does not comprise transitional provisions concerning limitation periods. Therefore the intertemporal conflicts of the new act with other civil law acts are dealt with in depth. Consequently the area of compensation for loss is discussed. Within this area the author analyses the problematics of presumption of existence...

Submitted by Frederico Martins (frederico.martins2015@gvmail.br) on 2017-05-15T16:49:36Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Joana Martorini (joana.martorini@fgv.br) on 2017-05-15T17:26:00Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-15T18:58:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TC - Frederico Martins - Versão Final modificacoes banca.pdf: 929784 bytes, checksum: 2f70d0f6aa35f7010577b505e0ae26d3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-04-17 / O presente estudo aborda com detalhes obstáculos ao ajuizamento de ações privadas de reparação de danos de cartéis no Brasil, notadamente mediante análise dos institutos de direito envolvidos, comparação do tratamento dado a eles em outras jurisdições, análise da interpretação que as cortes brasileiras têm dado a eles nas poucas ações privadas de ressarcimento contra cartéis ajuizadas até o momento, bem como entrevistas de autoridade do CADE para trazer à pesquisa o ponto de vista da autoridade concorrencial, sobretudo no que diz respeito ao compartilhamento de documentos do processo administrativo. Ao final da abordagem de cada tema, buscou-se oferecer soluções propositivas para a superação dos referidos obstáculos e, com isso, fornecer substratos para desenvolvimento das ações privadas de ressarcimento de danos decorrentes de cartéis. / The present study addresses in detail the obstacles to private enforcement of cartels in Brazil, through the analysis of the applicable legal principles, comparing the treatment given to them in other jurisdictions, and analyzing the interpretation that Brazilian courts have given to them in the few private lawsuits for compensations of cartel damages filed in Brazil so far. Interviews with the Brazilian antitrust authority were also conducted in order to bring its point of view to the research, especially regarding the sharing of documents of the administrative proceeding. Concluding each topic of the study, we tried to offer propositive solutions to overcome these obstacles and, with this, to provide tools for the development of private enforcement of cartels in Brazil.

Le Livre Vert et le Livre Blanc de la Commission Européenne sur les actions en dommages-intérêts en cas d'infraction au droit communautaire de la concurrence ont constaté « le sous-développement total » de l'action en réparation des infractions au droit de la concurrence et proposé certaines réformes afin de remédier aux obstacles identifiés. L'étude empirique remet toutefois partiellement en cause ce constat, car il convient de distinguer réparation des concurrents (contentieux horizontal) et réparation des consommateurs (contentieux collectif). Les actions en réparation du préjudice d'éviction engagées entre concurrents apparaissent raisonnablement efficaces. Elles donnent lieu assez fréquemment à des décisions favorables et le montant des dommages-intérêts alloués est parfois significatif. Ainsi, les réformes proposées en matière probatoire pour l'accès aux documents n'apporteraient aucun progrès sensible, pas plus que l'adoption d'un instrument non-contraignant sur la quantification du préjudice. En revanche, les actions en réparation du préjudice de surcoût engagées par les acheteurs directs ou indirects paraissent vouées à l'échec dans le cadre actuel de la responsabilité civile, en l'absence de mécanisme de recours collectif et de distribution efficaces. La réflexion engagée au niveau national et européen ne paraît guère pouvoir contourner l’obstacle de la distribution massive de dommages-intérêts diffus, et les options envisagées ne semblent guère convaincantes. Il est donc proposé alternativement au bénéfice des consommateurs, un mécanisme public de recours collectif, confié aux autorités de concurrence nationales et à la Commission européenne. Cette réforme peut être engagée à droit constant dans le cadre des pouvoirs existants de la Commission européenne et de l'Autorité de la concurrence. Il conviendrait à cet effet de réviser la politique d’amende afin de sanctionner le défaut d’indemnisation des consommateurs, et d’affecter une partie du produit des amendes à des mesures de réparation directes ou indirectes, pécuniaires ou en nature, des consommateurs affectés par l’infraction. / The Green Paper and the White Paper on damages actions for breach of EU competition law found private antitrust enforcement in a state of “total underdevelopment” and proposed reforms to adress the identified obstacles. Empirical study of french case law does not support entirely these findings, because it’s important to distinguish between actions brought against competitors, and actions brought by consumers. Exclusionary practices litigated between competitors show reasonable success compared to similar cases. The reforms proposed by the European Commission concerning access to documents and quantification of damages would not bring any significant improvement to french law. However, damages actions in compensation of overcharges brought by direct and indirect purchasers seem doomed to failure, in the absence of a collective action and distribution mechanism. Debate is storming at EU and national level, but the considered options appear unconvincing. It is proposed a public mechanism for collective redress. Within their existing powers, competition authorities should review the fine policy to achieve collective compensation as private penalty. Substantial amount of fines should be inflicted when infringers cannot show they have taken active steps to provide compensation to consumers. In that case, a partial amount of the total fine should be dedicated to compensate consumer, directly or indirectly, in pecuniary or non-pecuniary form. Competition authorities should have the power to order infringers to create trust funds for that purpose.

(English) Regulation of damages in the field of competition law in Czech and French law with regard to European regulation The purpose of this thesis is to analyze particular elements of actions for damages for infringements of the competition law, mainly those, which are contained in the Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union. Given that a directive is source of law sui generis that needs to be transposed into national legislations, it seems convenient to attempt to illustrate its effects on particular national legislations. The paper deals with actual states of legislation in the Czech republic and in France and attempts firstly to discover existing elements of the legislation and secondly on the other hand to indicate some missing or problematic parts. The thesis is, besides introduction and conclusion, composed of five main chapters. Chapter two observes the conception and evolution of the competition law in the European Union and particularly the origin of thoughts about private enforcement of the competition law. Chapter three focuses on the case law of Court of justice of the European Union that is...

Efficient enforcement of cartel law This thesis deals with the issue of effective enforcement of cartel law, focusing on the interaction between public and private enforcement. The aim of this thesis is to compare the enforcement systems of cartel law in Czech, European and American legal systems, in particular to compare the form and functioning of two key tools of public and private enforcement, i.e. the leniency program and the actions for damages, to analyse the interaction between them, reveal the main tension and finally to compare the solutions to this conflict that are offered by different legal systems. I am comparing the solutions offered by current legislation in the EU and the Czech Republic with the solutions of US antitrust law where both tools coexist and have been successfully operating for some time. On the basis of such comparison I will try to determine whether the current solution is effective or whether there exists a more suitable one. The thesis consists of three parts. The first part is divided into two chapters, where the first chapter defines the basic terminology that relates to the issue of antitrust law enforcement. Further it contains a description of relevant sources of law. The second chapter deals with various antitrust law enforcement models which operate within...

Title: Selected Aspects of Private Enforcement of Competition Law The purpose of the study is to analyse and compare selected provisions and legislative proposals regarding to the rules of evidence and locus standi as they are codified in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and in Czech Rules of Civil Procedure as well as selected aspects of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in UK. It should be stressed the fact that the rules of evidence and locus standi are seen through a prism of antitrust claims for damages. The study is composed of six chapters, each of them dealing with different aspect of Private Enforcement of Competition Law. Chapter One is introductory and defines basic terminology used in the study. Chapter Two focuses on legal basis for antitrust claims for damages. Chapter Three consists of three parts. Part One focuses on locus standi issue in US Law. Part Two is an analysis of proposals of EU Commission as well as relevant judgements of Court of Justice of European Union. Partial conclusions are drawn in Part Three. Chapter Four consists of three parts. Part One investigates the principles of rules of evidence as they are codified in Czech Law. Part Two discusses the American attitude to rules of evidence. Partial conclusions are drawn in Part Three. Chapter Five consists also of...

The relationship between private and public enforcement of cartel law has been heavily discussed in the recent years, both in legal doctrine and political circles. The European Commission has come up with various initiatives in order to promote and support changes in the legal orders of the EU Member States, which would make the private enforcement of cartel law easier and more accessible, especially for consumers, but for other subjects impaired by the violation of competition rules as well. However, this effort needs to be balanced with the existing system of public enforcement, notably with the established and well-funcioning leniency programmes. A strenghtened "private pillar" must not cause any damage to the exisitng "public pillar". Can private enforcement be an efficient complement to the hitherto system (predominantly public), and if so, where are the limits of it? On one hand, the support of private enforcement could discourage cartelists to participate in the leniency programmes, because the possible economic benefits (exemption from fines) might not outweigh the losses (huge amounts paid on damages in connection with follow-on actions). On the other hand, it has been argued that private enforcement is deeply underdeveloped in the European Union and no ideas of the European Commission drawing...

Impact of the Leniency Program and the Institution of Settlement upon the Civil Enforcement of Competition Law Keywords: competition law, leniency program, private enforcement of competition law The purpose of this thesis is to assess the mutual interference between the private and public enforcement of competition law. In the public enforcement there is growing trend of using modern tools such as leniency programme or settlement decisions. These are based on the cooperation between competition authorities and undertakings. On the other hand such cooperation and very often disclosure of confidential information by undertakings may threaten their position in terms of potential civil law suits by consumers or business partners. It is often claimed that private and public enforcement are complementary but when it comes to these modern tools a clear conflict arises. The thesis consists of two following two chapters. First chapter describes the evolution of private enforcement of competition law within EU. From its underdeveloped beginnings ten years ago it started to attract attention. European Commission has recently published a proposal of a directive which should foster the private enforcement within EU. Second half of the first chapter describes the development of new modern tools within the public...

The class action is an important instrument for the enforcement of consumers' rights, particularly in personal actions for low sums known as Negative Expected Value (NEV) suits. Collective redress actions transform NEV suits into Positive Expected Value suits using economies of scale by the aggregation of smaller actions into a single legal action which is economically worthwhile pursuing. Collective redress promotes adherence to the law, deters illegal actions and furthers public interests. Collective redress also helps in the management of multiple cases in court. The introduction of a new class action model in Israel has proven to be very workable in the sense that it has improved access to justice, albeit that this system currently suffers from over-use, referred to in this work as the "flood problem". The purpose of this research is to introduce a class action model which brings with it the advantages of the Israeli model, as well as improvements upon it so as to promote consumer confidence in low figure transactions by individuals with large, powerful companies. The new model suggested in this work relies on the opt-out mechanism, monitored by regulatory bodies through public regulation or by private regulators. The reliance on the supremacy of public enforcement and follow-on actions over private stand-alone actions should make the system of collective redress more efficient than the current Israeli model, reducing the risk of a flood of actions whilst at the same time improving access to justice for large groups of claimants. Thus far, no unified European class action mechanism has been developed, and only some member states have developed their own systems. The model discussed in this work may be implemented as a unified set of rules in Europe, with some additional adjustments, such as those covering cross-border trade, to promote confidence in trade within the European Union.