header-logo header-logo

03 October 2019 / Audrey Dwyer
Issue: 7858 / Categories: Features , Competition , EU , Commercial
printer mail-detail

The ripple effect

8649
The ECJ has been advised to expand the scope for claims against cartelists to those indirectly affected. Audrey Dwyer reports

In a potentially significant opinion (the Opinion), Juliane Kokott (AG Kokott), Advocate General to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), advised the ECJ that parties who did not directly participate in the market in which a cartel operated should be permitted to claim damages from the members of the cartel.

It remains to be seen how the ECJ will approach this issue in its final decision on the matter, but, if followed, this approach could represent a significant expansion of the scope for private damages claims against cartel participants in the EU.

Would-be claimants are nevertheless likely to face significant hurdles in demonstrating causation, however, and it will be for the national courts of member states to determine their own approach to these questions.

Background

The Opinion, which is non-binding, was prepared in the context of a claim brought by Upper Austria for damages arising out of cartel arrangements between

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll