Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Open Access The Potential of Antitrust Collective Litigation in 2017

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

The Potential of Antitrust Collective Litigation in 2017

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance

The European Commission expected to assess the implementation of the 2013 Recommendation on collective redress by 26 July 2017, yet the Commission missed the deadline. Despite this failure, the Recommendation is still on the EU agenda: a public consultation has been started with the intention to assess how the EU member states responded to the 2013 proposal. On the one hand, it should be welcomed that the Commission remains ambitious regarding an EU-wide collective redress mechanism. On the other hand, it should be highlighted that the Commission is concentrating too much on the American system, which significantly differs in terms of rationale, design, and stated goals. Indeed, utilising one or another American element does not inevitably lead to the perceived issue of “blackmail settlement”. This is further qualified by positive experiences in pro-active EU member states, which have experimented with US-oriented tools in order to facilitate collective actions in their jurisdictions. This article explores how insights from the EU countries and the US should influence the debate on EU-style collective antitrust redress, if and when the time arises to take another step in the field.

Affiliations: 1: PhD candidate, Universiteit Leiden, Europa Institute, The Netherlands, z.juska@umail.leidenuniv.nl

10.1163/22134514-00404003
/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00404003
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading

The European Commission expected to assess the implementation of the 2013 Recommendation on collective redress by 26 July 2017, yet the Commission missed the deadline. Despite this failure, the Recommendation is still on the EU agenda: a public consultation has been started with the intention to assess how the EU member states responded to the 2013 proposal. On the one hand, it should be welcomed that the Commission remains ambitious regarding an EU-wide collective redress mechanism. On the other hand, it should be highlighted that the Commission is concentrating too much on the American system, which significantly differs in terms of rationale, design, and stated goals. Indeed, utilising one or another American element does not inevitably lead to the perceived issue of “blackmail settlement”. This is further qualified by positive experiences in pro-active EU member states, which have experimented with US-oriented tools in order to facilitate collective actions in their jurisdictions. This article explores how insights from the EU countries and the US should influence the debate on EU-style collective antitrust redress, if and when the time arises to take another step in the field.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/journals/22134514/4/4/22134514_004_04_s003_text.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00404003&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00404003
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00404003
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00404003
2017-12-13
2018-06-25

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation