By Francisco Marcos (IE Law School)
Recent decisions by the Spanish Supreme Court compensating for damages caused by the Spanish Sugar cartel to the sugar confectionery industry closed the different procedures associated sugar cartel damages claims. The cartel had operated in the Spanish market of sugar for industrial uses between February 1995 and July 1996. The case is a good the example of successful antitrust private claim damage following the investigation and punishment of the cartel by the competition authorities.
Apart from granting the compensation requested by the Spanish confectioners, the Supreme Court has clarified several issues relevant to the filing, rationale and defense of antitrust private claims. The litigation strategy of the parties in this type of litigation should take into account the dicta of the Supreme Court in this case. Indeed, starting from the right of victims to full compensation for damages, the Supreme Court has made clear the effect that previous decisions by the administrative authorities and administrative judicial courts must have before the civil Court. Additionally, the Supreme Court properly dissected the various components of the damage that can result from anticompetitive conduct violating the competition rules, asserting with sound judgment on what should be the content of the technical expert reports accompanying each parties’ allegations.
Finally, the Supreme Court rulings on the claims of damages caused by the sugar cartel set a firm ground on which to build the future of private enforcement of competition law in Spain, together with the support of the new Directive European Parliament and of the Council on certain rules that will govern the claims for damages for violations of the provisions of the competition law of the Member States and the EU.
Download Full Article: Here
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand