Blog Post

Antitrust damages: the European Commission’s proposal

The European Commission has just adopted its proposed directive that would harmonise within the EU rules related to antitrust damages. The initiative aims to enable victims of antitrust abuses to obtain compensation in a consistent and effective manner.

By: Date: June 11, 2013 Topic: Digital economy and innovation

The European Commission has just adopted its proposed directive that would harmonise within the EU rules related to antitrust damages. The initiative aims to enable victims of antitrust abuses to obtain compensation in a consistent and effective manner. To give a simple example of what that could mean in practice: in a recent policy brief, Bruegel estimated that cartels uncovered by the European Commission between 2000 and 2012 shifted up to €48 billion from customers of cartelised products to sellers. Once enforced, the antitrust damages directive should in principle allow a significant chunk of that value to be claimed back by customers, regardless of where those customers are based in Europe. Decisions of the European Commission and of national competition authorities could then be used as direct evidence in national civil courts that the infringement occurred.

Currently, only 16 countries allow victims to sue for antitrust damages. And because of legislative fragmentation within the single market, large-scale lawsuits are rare. Differences in the way rights to damages are guaranteed in the member states distort the incentives to comply with EU competition law and imply differences in the level of deterrence within the single market. Recent studies suggest that when actions for damages in courts are a credible threat, they help to reduce the incentives that companies might have to breach antitrust laws. Moreover, the lack of a consistent EU framework creates uncertainty and therefore makes it difficult for companies, particularly those that operate in multiple countries, to predict the risk they face if they breach antitrust law. Harmonisation is therefore good news.

The key issues of substance in the draft directive concern information disclosure and damage quantification. On the first issue, the Commission’s proposal attempts to strike a balance between the right of claimants to obtain all the necessary information to support their claim in Court, and the need to preserve the incentives for companies to reveal information about ongoing conspiracies. The proposal suggests that specific types of information provided by infringing companies should not be disclosed to claimants (namely: corporate statements by whistle-blowers and submissions aimed at settling cases amicably). Whistle-blowing companies should also be liable only for the damage they directly caused, that is they would not pay for the indirect damage caused by the establishment of a cartel, such as an overall increase in market prices by all market players. Quantification of damages is a tricky issue. It requires estimating the ‘counter-factual’ scenario, ie how the market would have performed had the infringement not been committed. This estimation will depend heavily on the starting assumptions and on the level of detail and accuracy of the available data.

The European Commission appears less bold on the more general issue of collective redress. On that subject, the proposal contains only guidelines that member states will be free to ignore. It is therefore doubtful if the guidelines will have any effect at all, given the strong domestic resistance from industry that EU governments face. US-style class-actions may cause an excessive and unjustified burden on companies, but the Commission’s proposal establishes a number of safeguards to limit the risk of litigation abuse. For example, it suggests that only state-appointed non-profit entities can act on behalf of claimants. Moreover, in the Commission’s framework, affected consumers would not join the action by default (as happens in the US). The so-called ‘opt-in’ option requires consumers to take the initiative to join the claimants’ group in order to be entitled to compensation. If these safeguards are considered sufficiently effective in preventing abuse or excessive burden for companies, it is therefore difficult to understand why these rules should just come in the form of guidelines and not be uniformly enforced throughout the single market.

The EC’s proposal will be presented and discussed at Bruegel on June, 20.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

Three data realms: Managing the divergence between the EU, the US and China in the digital sphere

Major economies are addressing the challenges brought by digital trade in different ways, resulting in diverging regulatory regimes. How should we view these divergences and best deal with them?

Speakers: Susan Ariel Aaronson, Henry Gao, Esa Kaunistola and Niclas Poitiers Topic: Digital economy and innovation, Global economy and trade Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 19, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

REPowerEU: will EU countries really make it work?

By acting together, the European Union can optimise its response to the energy crisis in all scenarios but each country will have to make concessions.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Green economy Date: May 18, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Adapting to European technology regulation: A conversation with Brad Smith, President of Microsoft

Invitation-only event featuring Brad Smith, President and Vice Chair of Microsoft who will discuss regulating big tech in the context of Europe's digital transformation

Speakers: Maria Demertzis and Brad Smith Topic: Digital economy and innovation Location: Bibliothéque Solvay, Rue Belliard 137A, 1000 Bruxelles Date: May 18, 2022
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Buy now, pay later: the age of digital credit

A relatively new fintech market, BNPL is currently not regulated in the EU, meaning that consumers do not have the same protection level as they do for other credit products.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Digital economy and innovation Date: May 17, 2022
Read article
 

Blog Post

The EU needs transparent oil data and enhanced coordination

The EU lacks the coordination structure and transparent data necessary to most effectively navigate an embargo on Russian oil.

By: Agata Łoskot-Strachota, Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann Topic: Global economy and trade, Green economy Date: May 16, 2022
Read about event More on this topic
 

Upcoming Event

Jun
7
10:30

Future of Work and Inclusive Growth Annual Conference

Annual Conference of the Future of Work and Inclusive Growth project

Speakers: Erik Brynjolfsson, Francis Green, Ivailo Kalfin, Laura Nurski, J. Scott Marcus, Anoush Margaryan, Julia Nania, Poon King Wang and Fabian Stephany Topic: Digital economy and innovation Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event
 

Past Event

Past Event

[Cancelled] Shifting taxes in order to achieve green goals

[This event is cancelled until further notice] How could shifting the tax burden from labour to pollution and resources help the EU reach its climate goals?

Speakers: Niclas Poitiers and Femke Groothuis Topic: Green economy, Macroeconomic policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 12, 2022
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Insights for successful enforcement of Europe’s Digital Markets Act

The European Commission will enforce digital competition rules against big tech; internally, it should ensure a dedicated process and teams; externally, it should ensure cooperation with other jurisdictions and coherence with other digital policies.

By: Christophe Carugati and Catarina Martins Topic: Digital economy and innovation Date: May 11, 2022
Read article Download PDF More by this author
 

Book/Special report

European governanceInclusive growth

Bruegel annual report 2021

The Bruegel annual report provides a broad overview of the organisation's work in the previous year.

By: Bruegel Topic: Banking and capital markets, Digital economy and innovation, European governance, Global economy and trade, Green economy, Inclusive growth, Macroeconomic policy Date: May 6, 2022
Read article
 

External Publication

The Global Quest for Green Growth: An Economic Policy Perspective

A review on green growth and degrowth arguments.

By: Klaas Lenaerts, Simone Tagliapietra and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global economy and trade, Green economy Date: May 5, 2022
Read article
 

Blog Post

How a European Union tariff on Russian oil can be designed

The European Union should apply a tariff on imports of Russian oil; it can be accompanied by a quota for a gradual, conditional phase-out of all Russian oil imports.

By: David Kleimann, Ben McWilliams and Georg Zachmann Topic: Global economy and trade, Green economy Date: April 29, 2022
Read article
 

Opinion

EU risks letting Putin’s gas divide-and-rule strategy win

The 2 May meeting of EU energy ministers should deliver strong and common EU action. Failing to do so would undermine Europe’s unity, energy security and foreign policy.

By: Agata Łoskot-Strachota, Simone Tagliapietra and Georg Zachmann Topic: Global economy and trade, Green economy Date: April 29, 2022
Load more posts