Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorUPTON, Michaelen
dc.date.accessioned2006-06-09T09:55:26Z
dc.date.available2006-06-09T09:55:26Z
dc.date.issued1996
dc.identifier.citationFlorence : European University Institute, 1996en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/5646
dc.descriptionAward date: 31 December 1996
dc.descriptionSupervisor: K.-H. Ladeur
dc.descriptionPDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017
dc.descriptionFirst made available in Open Access: 03 June 2024en
dc.description.abstractThe five chapters of this dissertation address the questions of: (i) why the Community seeks to encourage the enforcement of articles 85 and 86 in the national courts; (ii) the competing arguments for and against such enforcement; (iii) the extent to which it is happening; (iv) what difficulties are faced by private enforcement; and (v) how private enforcement in the national courts might be encouraged further. The dissertation does not seek to provide a direct answer to the question of why private enforcement is not more prevalent, because of the breadth of the inquiries that would be necessary for that purpose. It is both easier and more practical to consider instead what measures could be taken to encourage such litigation, even at the risk that such measures might serve only to counter-balance, rather than to remove, whatever unidentified factors there are that may be dissuading persons from litigating. Nevertheless, the answer to question (iv) probably goes some way to answering the question of why the Community has level of private enforcement that has been recorded to date. The dissertation addresses these questions within the context of the legal systems of the United Kingdom. Those systems use procedures which, of all Community legal systems, depend to the greatest extent on the initiative of the parties and their lawyers. The dissertation therefore considers the practicalities of enforcing articles 85 and 86 from the point of view of the private lawyer to a greater extent than might be appropriate in jurisdictions where the judiciary have a more active role.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherEuropean University Instituteen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUIen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesLAWen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesLLM Thesisen
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.lcshAntitrust law -- European Union countries
dc.subject.lcshCompetition, Unfair -- European Union countries
dc.titlePractical aspects of the private enforcement of EC competition lawen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.identifier.doi10.2870/697699en
eui.subscribe.skiptrue


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record