PRIVATE LAWSUITS IN THE UNITED STATES AS A WAY TO PROTECT PARTICIPANTS IN CIVIL LAW TRANSACTIONS FROM VIOLATIONS OF ANTITRUST LAWS


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Creating an effective market economy requires a systematic approach, including the creation of conditions for the proper development of competition. Experience shows that the use of only administrative methods to counter violations of antitrust laws is not enough. Russian lawyers have repeatedly pointed out the need for the development of private legal methods to combat anti-competitive acts. Over the past few years, the antimonopoly authorities of the Russian Federation have been actively involved in the creation of methods that allow the use of such methods to be expanded in Russia. The article proposes a study of the legislative experience of the United States that have accumulated significant experience in this field. Currently, more than 90 percent of antitrust lawsuits are filed by consumers. [1; 4] The author explores the rights of individuals to file claims for damages caused by violations of antitrust laws, the rights of persons of indirect counterparties, types of claims.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Julia Alexandrovna Artemieva

Russian Peoples’ Friendship University

Email: kafedra gtp@mail.ru
PhD at law, Associate Professor.. Position: Associate Professor. Department: Civil Law and Civil Process and Private International Law chair

References

  1. The International Handbook on Private Enforcement of Competition Law / Ed. by Foer A.A. and Cuneo J.W. Cheltenhem: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2012, P. 4
  2. Dudin M., Sertakova O., Frolova E., Artemieva Y, Galkina M. Development of methodological approaches to assessing the quality of healthcare services. // QUALITY-Access to Success, June 2017. Vol. 18, Nr. 158. р.71-79. ISSN15822559-Romania-Scopus.
  3. Dudin M.N., Frolova E.E., Kovalev S.I., Ermakova E.P., Kirsanov A.N. (2017) Migration Processes In The Context Of Political Collisions: Factors And Social And Economic Consequences // Journal of Applied Economic Sciences. 2017. Т. 12. №1 (47). С. 85-94. ISSN 18436110
  4. Dudin M.N., Frolova E.E., Protopopova O.V., Artemieva Ju.A., Abashidze A.H. (2016) Latin America And Russia On The Course Of Mutual Contingence Under Conditions Of Global Economic Crisis // International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research. 2016. Т. 14. № 15. С. 11161-11170. ISSN : 0972-7302
  5. Dudin M.N., Ivashchenko N.P., Frolova Е.Е., Abashidze A.H. (2017) Institutional Approach to Establishment of a Structural Model of the Russian Academic Environment Development// European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2017. Т. 6. № 1. С. 22-38. E-ISSN: 2305-6746.
  6. Hovenkamp H. Federal Antitrust Policy. The Law of Competition and its Practice. // West. 4th ed. 2011. 906 p.
  7. Kolasky W. Antitrust litigation: what’s changed in twenty-five years? // Antitrust. 2012. Vol. 27. № 1.
  8. Areeda Р. Antitrust Violations without Damage Recoveries.// Harvard Law Review. Vol. 89, No. 6 (Apr., 1976), pp. 1127-1139
  9. Reiter v. Sonotone Corp., 442 U.S. 330 (1979). [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: https://law.resource.org/pub/ us/case/reporter/US/442/442.US.330.78-690.html/ дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  10. Loeb v. Eastman Kodak Co., 183 F. 704 (3d Cir. 1910). [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: https://casetext.com/ case/loeb-v-eastman-kodak?page=709/ дата обращения: 02.05.19).
  11. Conference of Studio Unions v. Lowe's Inc., 198 F.2d 51 (9th Cir. 1951), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 919, 72 S.Ct. 367 (1952). [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://openjurist.org/193/f2d/51/conference-of-studio-unions-v-loews-inc/ дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  12. Hovenkamp H. Black Letter Outline on Antitrust (Black Letter Outlines). // West. 5th ed. 2011. 464 p.
  13. Jones A., Sufrin B. EC Competition Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. // Oxford University Press. 2014. 1331 р.
  14. Illinois Brick Co. v Illinois., 431 U.S. 720 (1977). [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/431/720.html/ дата обр.: 02.05.2019).
  15. A Legal and Economic Analysis of the Cost-Pius Contract Exception in Hanover Shoe and Illinois Brick, 47 U.Chi.L.Rev. 743 (1980). URL: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/1599341?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents (дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  16. Arizona v. Shamrock Foods Co., 729 F.2d 1208 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1197 (1985). [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://openjurist.org/729/f2d/1208/state-of-arizona-v-shamrock-foods-company-j-alton/ дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  17. Lawiter D.C., Zschocke Ch.O., Rich J.M. Class Action Litigation In The United States: Antitrust Litigation As A Case Study. // URL: https://www.morganlewis.com/ pubs/01B7AE21-A921-4892-96CF8E0EC68E46CE _Publication.pdf (дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  18. Foer A.A., Cuneo J.W. Cheltenhem// Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2012, P. 4. ISBN-13: 978-1781005286.
  19. Bronsteen J. Class Action Settlements: An Opt-In Proposal. // URL: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/view-content.agi?article=1209&context=facpubs ( дата обращения: 02.05.2019). P. 907
  20. Sherman Antitrust Act (Sherman Act), 1890. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://www.civics-online.org/lib-rary/format-ted/texts/sherman _antitrust.html / дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  21. Clayton Antitrust Act, 1914. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/ clayton-antitrust-act/
  22. Class Action Fairness Act. 2005. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ2/pdf/ PLAW-109publ2.pdf/ дата обр.: 02.05.2019).
  23. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/ дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  24. Federal Trade Commission Act. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  25. Merger Guidelines. [Электрон. ресурс] // URL: http://www.justice.gov/atr/hmerger/11248.htm/ дата обращения: 02.05.2019).
  26. Аntitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004. (ACPERA) // https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/ Public_Law_108-237/Title_II дата обр.: 02.05.2019).
  27. Class Action Fairness Act 2005г. https://www.cong-ress.gov/109/plaws/publ2/PLAW-109publ2.pdf дата обращения: 02.05.2019).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies