Informacja

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

Wyszukujesz frazę "private and public enforcement" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4
Tytuł:
Antitrust Private Enforcement – Case of Poland
Autorzy:
Jurkowska, Agata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530057.pdf
Data publikacji:
2008-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
private and public enforcement
private parties
antitrust damages
court proceedings
collective redress
damage actions
Opis:
This article presents the main difficulties surrounding private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland, currently the key implementation problem in the field of antitrust law. Whereas the basic standards concerning the public pillar of antitrust enforcement have already been established, either in the European Community (EC) or in its Member States, the private pillar of antitrust enforcement has not yet been fully developed. The fact that private enforcement of antitrust law is possible, and in fact equal, to public enforcement is not yet commonly recognized. In response to the European Commission’s White Paper on Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, private enforcement of antirust law is presently under intense discussion in EC Member States. This article should be considered as one of the contributions to this debate. It presents the main legal framework of private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland. In order to do so, it directly refers to the Polish Act on competition and consumer protection, the Civil Code and the Civil Procedure Code. This article also discusses Polish case law in this area. It aims to assess whether existing Polish legal provisions are, in fact, sufficient to ensure effective private enforcement of Polish as well as EC antitrust law. The article refers to the main proposals of the European Commission’s White Paper. It is concluded that private enforcement of antitrust law is indeed possible in Poland on the basis of currently applicable procedural rules, even if there are no special instruments designed to facilitate it. However, it cannot be expect that in the current legal climate, private parties will eagerly and frequently apply for damages in cases of a breach of Polish antitrust law. Antitrust cases are special in many aspects and, thus, they require specific solutions in procedural terms. This article aims to pinpoint those areas, where the Polish law needs to be changed in order to develop and promote private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2008, 1(1); 59-79
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The Interaction of Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law before and after the EU Directive – a Hungarian perspective
Autorzy:
Toth, Tihamer
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529889.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement
discovery
leniency
damages
joint and several liability
amicus curiae
class action
representative action
Opis:
The paper explores the changes the EU Directive on harmonizing certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions will bring about in Hungary, with a special focus placed on damages liability rules, the interaction of public and private enforcement of these rules, and the importance of class actions. Amendments of the Competition Act introduced in 2005 and 2009 had created new rules to promote the idea of private enforcement even before the Directive was adopted. Some of these rules remain unique even now, notably the legal presumption of a 10% price increase for cartel cases. However, subsequent cases decided by Hungarian courts did not reflect the sophistication of existing substantive and procedural rules. There has only ever been one judgment awarding damages, while most stand-alone cases involved minor competition law issues relating to contractual disputes. The paper looks at the most important substantial rules of tort law (damage, causality, joint and several liability), the co-operation of competition authorities and civil courts, as well as at (the lack of) class action procedures from the perspective of the interaction of public and private enforcement of competition law.
Le document analyse les changements apportés par la directive européenne relative aux certaines règles régissant les actions en dommages et intérêts en droit national pour les infractions aux dispositions du droit de la concurrence en Hongrie, en particulier concernant les règles sur la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages, l’interaction de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence et l'importance des recours collectifs. Les modifications à loi de la concurrence introduites en 2005 et 2009 ont créé de nouvelles règles pour promouvoir l'idée d'une application privée du droit de la concurrence même avant que la directive a été adoptée. Certaines de ces dispositions sont toujours uniques, notamment la présomption légale d'une augmentation de prix de 10% par les ententes. Néanmoins, les jugements ultérieurs rendus par les tribunaux ne reflétaient pas les règles de fond et de procédures sophistiquées. Il n’y avait juste le jugement qui a accordé des dommages et intérêts, alors que la plupart des actions autonomes (« stand-alone actions ») portaient sur des problèmes secondaires du droit de la concurrence liés aux conflits contractuels. L’article examine des règles les plus importantes du droit de la responsabilité civile (le dommage, la causalité, la responsabilité solidaire), la coopération entre les autorités de la concurrence et les tribunaux civils, ainsi que l’absence de mécanisme de recours collectifs et de la perspective de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2016, 9(14); 43-68
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
How to Throw the Baby out with the Bath Water. A Few Remarks on the Currently Accepted Scope of Civil Liability for Antitrust Damages
Autorzy:
Jurkowska-Gomułka, Agata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530217.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust civil liability
damage
Directive 12014/104
joint and several liability
immunity recipient
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
umbrella pricing
Opis:
The Damages Directive introduces the right to ‘full compensation’ and the principle of ‘joint and several liability’ for antitrust damages (Article 3(1) and Article 11(1) respectively). The Directive does not determine the type of damage that can be awarded in civil proceedings. In theory, there are thus no barriers to establish punitive, multiple or other damages. In practice, it is rather unlikely that such types of damages will be awarded after the implementation of the Directive due to the ban placed on overcompensation in its Article 2(3). This paper will try to decode the concept of ‘full compensation’ and ‘joint and several liability’ in light of the Damages Directive as well as EU jurisprudence. An adequate understanding of these terms is without a doubt one of the key preconditions of correctly implementing the Directive and, consequently, a condition for making EU (competition) law effective. While on the one hand, a limitation of the personal scope of civil liability can currently be observed in EU law (covering both legislation and case law), a broadening of its subject-matter scope is visible on the other hand. With reference to the personal scope of civil liability, the Directive itself limits the applicability of the joint and several responsibility principle towards certain categories of infringers: small & medium enterprises (Article 11(2)) and immunity recipients in leniency (Article 11(3)). Considering the subject-matter scope of civil liability, the acceptance by the Court of Justice of civil liability for the ‘price umbrella effect’ should be highlighted. In addition, the principle of the ‘passing-on defence’ can also be regarded as a manner of broadening the scope of civil liability for antitrust damage (Article 12–16). The paper will present an overview of the scope of civil liability for antitrust damages (in its personal and subject-matter dimension) in light of the Directive and EU jurisprudence. The paper’s goal is to assess if the applicable scope will in fact guarantee the effective development of private competition law enforcement in EU Member States. This assessment, as the very title of this paper suggests, will be partially critical.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 61-78
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The EU 2018 Draft Directive on UTPs in B2b Food Supply Chains and the Polish 2016 Act on Combating the Unfair Use of Superior Bargaining Power in the Trade in Agricultural and Food Products
Autorzy:
Piszcz, Anna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530328.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018-08-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
superior bargaining power
unfair use of superior bargaining power
trade in agricultural and food products
agricultural and food sector
public enforcement
private enforcement
enforcement authority
national competition authority
unfair trading practices
UTPs
business-to-business relationships
food supply chain
B2b food supply chain
small and medium-sized entrepreneurs
small and medium-sized enterprises
SMEs
suppliers
producers
producer organisations
associations of producer organisations
non-SMEs
buyers
‘one-sided’ protection
Opis:
The Polish Act on Counteracting the Unfair Use of Superior Bargaining Power in the Trade in Agricultural and Food Products was adopted on 15 December 2016 and entered into force on 12 July 2017. The new legal framework resembles, in some places, the legal rules contained in the 2007 Act on Competition and Consumer Protection, elsewhere resembles the 1993 Act on Combating Unfair Competition. Therefore, the article reviews the new Polish provisions taking into account the previous system including the prohibition of the abuse of a dominant position and the prohibition of unfair competition. This publication is intended to point out the peculiarities that characterize the new provisions. Readers will find here an assessment of recent Polish developments and suggestions for further development of the Polish legal framework in the EU context. In particular, the review critically analyses some solutions of the 2018 EU draft Directive on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the food supply chain and shows what amendments to the Polish legal framework will be needed, if the Directive is adopted in the current version.
La loi polonaise sur la lutte contre l’utilisation déloyale du pouvoir de négociation supérieure dans le commerce des produits agricoles et alimentaires a été adoptée le 15 décembre 2016 et est entrée en vigueur le 12 juillet 2017. Le nouveau cadre juridique ressemble, à certains endroits, aux règles juridiques contenues dans la loi de 2007 sur la concurrence et la protection des consommateurs, qui ressemble d’ailleurs à la loi de 1993 sur la lutte contre la concurrence déloyale. Par conséquent, l’article examine les nouvelles dispositions polonaises en tenant compte du système précédent, notamment l’interdiction de l’abus de position dominante et l’interdiction de la concurrence déloyale. Cette publication est censée mettre en évidence les particularités qui caractérisent les nouvelles dispositions. Les lecteurs trouveront ici une évaluation des développements récents en Pologne et des suggestions pour le développement du cadre juridique polonais dans le contexte de l’UE. En particulier l’article analyse de manière critique certaines solutions du projet de directive de l’UE de 2018 sur les pratiques commerciales déloyales dans les relations interentreprises au sein de la chaîne d’approvisionnement alimentaire et indique quelles modifications dans le cadre juridique polonais seront nécessaires si la directive soit adoptée dans la version actuelle.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2018, 11(17); 143-167
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4

    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