Mass Claims 2022 nr. 2

Mass claims in competition law - a UK perspective

Sir Peter Roth1

The first attempt by the United Kingdom to introduce a provision for collective actions for competition claims was a failure. 

 

In 2002, the UK competition legislation was amended to enable a designated body to bring claims on behalf of a group of consumers before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the CAT).  However, this measure had two significant limitations.  First, such a "consumer claim" could be brought only after a decision by a competition authority (or specialist regulator) finding a violation:  stand-alone collective proceedings, in the absence of a prior infringement decision, were not permitted.  Secondly, and more seriously, the legislation allowed only opt-in proceedings: each individual consumer had to sign up and agree to take part in the litigation.  The Consumers' Association was a designated body under the statute, and after the UK competition authority had found that various sports retailers had combined to fix the prices of replica England and ...

U heeft op dit moment geen toegang tot de volledige inhoud van dit product. U kunt alleen de inleiding en hoofdstukindeling lezen.

Wanneer u volledige toegang wenst tot alle informatie kunt u zich abonneren of inloggen als abonnee.


Verder in dit artikel:

Deel deze pagina:

Nog niet beoordeeld

Bijlage(n)

  • Bijlagen zijn alleen beschikbaar voor abonnees.

Artikel informatie

Type
Overig
Auteurs
Sir Peter Roth1
Auteursvermelding
Ik ben auteur van dit artikel
Datum artikel
Uniek Den Hollander publicatienummer
UDH:MC/17565

Verder in 2022 nr.2

 Mass claims in competition law - a UK perspective

The first attempt by the United Kingdom to introduce a provision for collective actions for competition claims was a failure.    In 2002, the UK competition legislation was amended to enable a desi...

 Judge Siofra O'Leary, President of the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, on Protocol 16 of the European Convention of Human Rights

Interview   We are delighted to have the opportunity to discuss with you the advisory opinion procedure under Protocol 16 of the European Convention of Human Rights.   1. Maybe we cou...

 For Justice, Not Profit: Public Funding of Collective Redress

Third-party litigation funding (TPLF) is widely viewed outside of Canada and the United States as indispensable to a viable collective litigation regime. Australia, for example, has a robust TPLF i...

 Encountering Class Actions in Swedish Law and Society

Class actions in Sweden are not flourishing. This article examines why the oldest class action regime in Scandinavia has not developed into anything more than a peripheral addition to the Swedish l...

 Bundling of claims by way of assignment in Italy

Bundling of claims by assignment (the so-called assignment model) is rapidly emerging in the European Union ("EU") as the favorite alternative to group actions for damages (either collective or rep...

 The role of class representatives in mass claims: Establishing the Class Representatives Network in the UK

Opinion Piece   In 2015 a new Consumer Rights Act[2] entered the statute books in the UK. It propelled the country's consumer rights framework into the modern era, bringing together a variet...

 VEB v BP: Centralisation of special jurisdiction in case of purely financial damages resulting from misinformation spread on the secondary securities market

Case Note: C-709/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:377   The judgment of the CJEU in VEB v BP confirms that the occurrence of purely financial loss in a bank account or investment account is in itself insu...

 Country reports

England and Wales, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain   England and Wales Anna Dannreuther and Jackie McArthur Case law Município de Mariana and others v BHP ...