SOME ASPECTS OF THE CONSIDERATION BY THE US COURTS OF PRIVATE ANTITRUST CLAIMS

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation has repeatedly raised the issue of the need to expand ways to influence violators of antitrust laws, proving the effectiveness of private law enforcement measures to protect the rights of persons affected by anti-competitive actions. [1] However, the number of claims for damages is still insignificant and their effectiveness is extremely small. The reasons for this are many, but the main problem is the difficulty of proving such a category of lawsuits. The authors propose to turn to the US experience for having accumulated a considerable amount of knowledge on antitrust dispute resolution for more than a hundred years. The article discusses the issues of determining the subject of proof, means of proof, methods of calculating damages in the resolution of private antitrust lawsuits in the United States. The purpose of the study is to analyze the US antitrust laws in the field of private law enforcement of consumer rights and small business. The author uses a set of philosophical, general scientific, private scientific methods of knowledge of theoretical and empirical material. In the course of this study, a dialectical materialist method was used, which allows studying the rules governing the procedure for determining the subject of proof, the procedure for calculating damages, the types of evidence used in their relationship, interdependence, contradiction, taking into account comprehensiveness and objectivity in the study. To carry out a comprehensive study of problematic issues, general scientific (analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, systemic) and private scientific (comparative legal, formal legal, technical legal, social modeling of research) methods are used in the work.

антимонопольное законодательство, взыскание убытков, частные иски, доктрина преюдиции, доктрина общих убытков