header-logo header-logo

Right to redress

16 August 2007 / Vincent Smith
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Features , Competition
printer mail-detail

Vincent Smith considers how cartel victims could benefit from EU enforcement and compensation initiatives

Competition is seen as the essential way to make sure markets of all kinds deliver high-quality, keenly-priced goods and services. But the efficiency of the market mechanism is undermined by both cartel activity and abuse of market power—market “dominance”. To date the main method of tackling these competition law infringements has been through public enforcement either by the European Commission or by national competition authorities, eg the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in the UK.

However, the European Commission has been considering how best to encourage private parties to enforce their right to redress where they are the victims of unlawful anti-competitive behaviour. It published the Green Paper on Damages Action for Breach of the EC Antitrust Rules in December 2005 and more recently (April 2006) the OFT has also published a discussion document, Private Actions in Competition Law: Effective Redress for Consumers and Business, on how to achieve the same aim in the UK. One of the main drivers behind

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll