The damages directive and consensual approach to antitrust enforcement

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)181-194
    JournalYearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies
    Volume8
    Issue number12
    Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

    damages
    mediation
    arbitration
    Law
    EU
    costs

    Keywords

    • Competition law
    • Antitrust damage
    • Consumers

    Cite this

    The damages directive and consensual approach to antitrust enforcement. / Moisejevas, Raimundas.

    In: Yearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies , Vol. 8, No. 12, 2015, p. 181-194.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{189dcfa54f154caabc64bb4ae62bc0a7,
    title = "The damages directive and consensual approach to antitrust enforcement",
    abstract = "The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts.",
    keywords = "Competition law , Antitrust damage, Consumers",
    author = "Raimundas Moisejevas",
    year = "2015",
    language = "English",
    volume = "8",
    pages = "181--194",
    journal = "Yearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies",
    issn = "1689-9024",
    number = "12",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The damages directive and consensual approach to antitrust enforcement

    AU - Moisejevas, Raimundas

    PY - 2015

    Y1 - 2015

    N2 - The article focuses on the novelties introduced by the Damages Directive in the field of consensual settlements of disputes concerning private enforcement. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the limitation period for bringing an action for damages is suspended for the duration of any consensual dispute resolution process. The Directive also establishes the main principles that govern the effect of consensual settlements on subsequent actions for damages. Since the EU framework for consensual dispute resolution of private enforcement disputes is quite new, many issues must still be solved in Member States’ practice. While analysing consensual dispute resolution in private enforcement cases, particular interest should be paid to mediation and arbitration as a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Mediation is often used in competition law litigation. In a mediation process, parties are subject to fewer legal costs than in litigation and arbitration. It may thus be concluded that consensual dispute resolution is usually a faster way to receive compensation. However, voluntary arrangements and ADR in competition law still raise many problems concerning both procedural and substantial legal acts.

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

    KW - Competition law

    KW - Antitrust damage

    KW - Consumers

    M3 - Article

    VL - 8

    SP - 181

    EP - 194

    JO - Yearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies

    JF - Yearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies

    SN - 1689-9024

    IS - 12

    ER -