Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "damages" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3
Tytuł:
Passing-on of Overcharges and the Implementation of the Damages Directive in CEE Countries
Autorzy:
Moisejevas, Raimundas
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530033.pdf
Data publikacji:
2017-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
consumers
passing-on of overcharges
Lithuania
private enforcement of competition law
antitrust damage claims
Directive on antitrust damages actions
calculation of damages
Opis:
The article focuses on the concept of passing-on of overcharges and the peculiarities of its regulation by the Damages Directive. The Damages Directive obliges Member States to ensure that the defendant in an action for damages may invoke the passing-on defence. Moreover, the Directive establishes the new framework and the main principles that govern the application of the passing-on defence. The national case law on passing-on is very insignificant in Central and Eastern European countries and many questions are expected to be raised in the courts of the CEE Member States. While discussing the concept of passing-on in the Damages Directive, a lot of emphasis should be paid to the issue of causation. Causation will definitely be the subject of most of the questions in cases when an indirect purchaser will bring a claim for damages. Causation may be tricky when an indirect purchaser claims it suffered an ‘overcharge harm’ because of passing-on. In most cases, the issue of causation will be decided mainly by national courts based on national procedural rules. Depending on the situation, passing-on may be used as a basis for the claim (as a ‘sword’) or as a defence (as a ‘shield’). It could be used as a basis for the claim by an indirect purchaser, in case s/he has suffered any harm because of the illegal actions of a cartelist or a dominant company. At the same time, it could be used as a defence by the infringer against a claim for damages. The article also analyses the specifics of the implementation of the Directive into the national laws of CEE Member States.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2017, 10(15); 133-146
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Development of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Lithuania
Autorzy:
Moisejevas, Raimundas
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529902.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
antitrust damage claims
Directive on antitrust damages actions
evidence
follow-on action
Lithuania
nullity
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
Opis:
The article reviews the jurisprudence of Lithuanian courts on private enforcement of competition law and identifies the main obstacles for the development of this practice. The analysis of the jurisprudence makes it possible to summarise that: most rulings of the Lithuanian courts relate to cases on the abuse of dominance; usually, dominant undertakings were allegedly applying discriminatory conditions towards the injured party and; most of the claims were presented as follow-on actions after a decision of the Competition Council. The courts held that damages caused by a breach of competition law have to be recovered in accordance with Lithuania’s main principles of civil responsibility. At the same time, the courts made it clear that their jurisprudence is based on the rulings of European Courts and the main principles of EU competition law. The main obstacles for the successful development of antitrust damages claims in Lithuania are, inter alia: complexity of competition cases; difficulty in obtaining substantive evidence; proving a consequential relationship and; high legal costs. The article also analyses substantial and procedural provisions of Lithuanian legislation that regulate the submission of antitrust damage claims.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(11); 35-52
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The Damages Directive and Consensual Approach to Antitrust Enforcement
Autorzy:
Moisejevas, Raimundas
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530189.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
consumers
arbitration
alternative dispute resolution
mediation
consensual dispute resolution
Lithuania
private enforcement of competition law
antitrust damage claims
Directive on antitrust damages actions
consensual settlements
Opis:
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.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 181-194
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies