Picture of virus under microscope

Research under the microscope...

The Strathprints institutional repository is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs.

Strathprints serves world leading Open Access research by the University of Strathclyde, including research by the Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences (SIPBS), where research centres such as the Industrial Biotechnology Innovation Centre (IBioIC), the Cancer Research UK Formulation Unit, SeaBioTech and the Centre for Biophotonics are based.

Explore SIPBS research

Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches

Rodger, Barry (2012) Private enforcement and collective redress: the benefits of empirical research and comparative approaches. Competition Law Review, 8 (1). pp. 1-6. ISSN 1745-638X

Full text not available in this repository. (Request a copy from the Strathclyde author)

Abstract

It is clear from a cursory examination of the academic literature in the field that private enforcement is an established, well-developed and vibrant mode of enforcement of US antitrust law constituting the preponderance of antitrust enforcement activity; complemented by public enforcement by the DOJ and FTC. Historically, a range of factors have combined to ensure that private enforcement is effectively the default setting for antitrust enforcement in general, namely: the wider litigative culture; the significant period of development of antitrust law and economics; and, specific characteristics of US civil procedure - the rules on discovery, the funding of actions, the availability of class actions, and the existence of treble damages actions - together with clarification (and modification) of the legal position in relation to issues such as the passing-on defence and standing for indirect purchasers. Private antitrust enforcement is a well developed and mature system of litigation in the US, in contrast with the position in the EU.