Private enforcement of competition law diversified effects of haphazard harmonisation

Małgorzata Kozak*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This chapter aims to assess the tensions between diversity of national procedural and tort systems of Member States and attempts by EU institutions, especially the CJEU, to maintain the effectiveness of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU through a private enforcement of EU competition law. While analysing the evolution of private enforcement of competition law within the EU, it is clear that in spite of ground-breaking instruments such as Directive 2014/104, the current legal framework is still far from being complete and successful. At first, the chapter analyses the objectives of the Directive and of the private enforcement, then discusses the process of adoption of the Directive. Subsequently, it deals with the character and the scope of the Directive, and then its implementation process. Finally, it analyses the areas that are generally harmonised in the Directive, but their detailed scope remains implicit and the non-harmonised areas left beyond the scope of the Directive and the role of the CJEU. At the end, critical conclusions are withdrawn.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationBalancing Unity and Diversity in EU Legislation
PublisherEdward Elgar Publishing
Chapter9
Pages155-174
Number of pages20
ISBN (Electronic)9781035302956
ISBN (Print)9781035302949
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 9 Apr 2024

Keywords

  • Private enforcement of competition law
  • Directive 2014/104
  • Competition law victims

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Private enforcement of competition law diversified effects of haphazard harmonisation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this