Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries

This paper discusses the use of consensual dispute resolution for the purpose of antitrust damage claims as introduced by the Directive. It presents these type of claims in a broader context of arbitration (or ADR), in comparison with traditional claim settling before a state court. Particular focus...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Warsaw 2017-08-01
Series:Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_15/49.pdf
id doaj-52b67a48122a43dfbe2c0cce5dc8120c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-52b67a48122a43dfbe2c0cce5dc8120c2020-11-25T03:25:45ZengUniversity of WarsawYearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies1689-90242545-01152017-08-011015496710.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2017.10.15.3Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE CountriesMałgorzata Modzelewska de Raad0Modzelewska & Paśnik Law FirmThis paper discusses the use of consensual dispute resolution for the purpose of antitrust damage claims as introduced by the Directive. It presents these type of claims in a broader context of arbitration (or ADR), in comparison with traditional claim settling before a state court. Particular focus is on selected CEE countries and their implementation of the Directive, serving as an example of the transposition of the Directive’s rules (Article 18 and 19) into national systems in the area of consensual dispute resolution. Specific institutions intended to encourage consensual resolution included in the Directive (and transposed into national systems) are being commented on as well. Lastly, the paper briefs on the advantages of ADR in general, and concludes that even post-Directive, ADR remains attractive as a complimentary instrument to public enforcement and state judiciary enforcement.https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_15/49.pdfprivate antitrust enforcementarbitrationcompetition law arbitrationdamages directive
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad
spellingShingle Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad
Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
private antitrust enforcement
arbitration
competition law arbitration
damages directive
author_facet Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad
author_sort Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad
title Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
title_short Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
title_full Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
title_fullStr Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
title_full_unstemmed Consensual Dispute Resolution in the Damage Directive. Implementation in CEE Countries
title_sort consensual dispute resolution in the damage directive. implementation in cee countries
publisher University of Warsaw
series Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
issn 1689-9024
2545-0115
publishDate 2017-08-01
description This paper discusses the use of consensual dispute resolution for the purpose of antitrust damage claims as introduced by the Directive. It presents these type of claims in a broader context of arbitration (or ADR), in comparison with traditional claim settling before a state court. Particular focus is on selected CEE countries and their implementation of the Directive, serving as an example of the transposition of the Directive’s rules (Article 18 and 19) into national systems in the area of consensual dispute resolution. Specific institutions intended to encourage consensual resolution included in the Directive (and transposed into national systems) are being commented on as well. Lastly, the paper briefs on the advantages of ADR in general, and concludes that even post-Directive, ADR remains attractive as a complimentary instrument to public enforcement and state judiciary enforcement.
topic private antitrust enforcement
arbitration
competition law arbitration
damages directive
url https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_15/49.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT małgorzatamodzelewskaderaad consensualdisputeresolutioninthedamagedirectiveimplementationinceecountries
_version_ 1724596025240322048