Private Enforcement of Antitrust
Show Less

Private Enforcement of Antitrust

Regulating Corporate Behaviour through Collective Claims in the EU and US

Arianna Andreangeli

Through the expert assessment of the US federal courts’ case on competition law, alongside that of domestic Europe, Arianna Andreangeli provides a fresh response to the issues surrounding collective litigation. The discussion is skillfully placed in the wider context of competition enforcement, whilst at the same time exploring both past and present trends. The book concludes that collective litigation of competition claims must strike a “fair balance” between respecting rules of due process and ensuring fuller access to justice.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 6: Collective litigation and collective redress in competition claims: continental solutions – the cases of Italy and the Netherlands

Arianna Andreangeli


The previous chapter discussed the rules and principles governing collective redress in England and Wales, in competition cases as well as more generally. It was shown how the existing system, based as it is on follow-on, opt-in litigation has so far not lived up to expectations for prompt, effective and easy to access redress of collective injuries caused by anti-competitive behaviour. It was also shown how, largely due to concerns for safeguarding the principle of personal autonomy in collective litigation, more generally applicable mechanisms of multi-party litigation, such as, inter alia, the Group Litigation Order, could not provide a suitable alternative to the remedy provided by the Competition Act 1998. In addition, the discussion of the Emerald Supplies case demonstrated that the representative action, to be lodged before the High Court under CPR Part 19(6) could not contribute to facilitating standalone competition litigation concerning a plurality of plaintiffs. Against this background, it was argued that the Consultation on Collective Redress launched by the Government Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, emerges as a turning point in the approach that should be adopted vis-à-vis the adjudication of multi-party disputes, not only in competition law but also in other areas, similarly characterized by “diffuse” torts.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.