Arbitration Agreements and Actions for Antitrust Damages After the CDC Hydrogen Peroxide Judgment
Journal Title: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies - Year 2017, Vol 10, Issue 16
Abstract
On May 21st 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union in CDC Hydrogen Peroxide decided whether the application of jurisdiction clauses in actions for damages impedes the effective enforcement of EU competition law. The CJ stayed silent, however, on how to treat arbitration clauses, which similarly to jurisdiction clauses, exclude a default court jurisdiction. The question of how to interpret arbitration agreements in the event of an antitrust violation and subsequent actions for damages remains thus unanswered. In light of the foreseen increase in private enforcement of EU competition law, this problem gains significance. This is because arbitration agreements may be frequently used to govern commercial relationships between antitrust infringers and their injured direct contractors. Against this background, the paper aims to analyse the consequences brought about by the existence of arbitration clauses in the event of actions for antitrust damages. It seeks to answer two questions: whether the claims for antitrust damages can be per se arbitrated, and whether the general arbitration clauses used by the parties to regulate their commercial relations cover the actions for antitrust damages. In order to address these problems, the papers draws attention to the CJ’s interpretation of jurisdiction clauses and the Polish experience of interpreting the scope of arbitration agreements in the field of unfair competition law. The paper reaches the conclusion that neither the arbitration nor EU law prevent arbitrating actions for antitrust damages. Whether a specific arbitration agreement covers actions for antitrust damages or not can be analyzed only with reference to the will of the parties interpreted under applicable national law. It is believed, however, that there are many reasons to adopt an arbitration-friendly interpretation of vague arbitration agreements.
Authors and Affiliations
Katarzyna Sadrak
Can an Ideal Court Model in Private Antitrust Enforcement Be Established?
Any discussion of private antitrust enforcement usually focuses on substantive law and proceedings applicable to private antitrust cases. Those elements are important, however, the efficacy of both public and private enf...
Compensatory Collective Redress: Will It Be Part of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in CEE Countries?
The article aims to compare and evaluate solutions with regard to compensatory collective redress existing in CEE countries. The author will attempt to illuminate obstacles and challenges to using collective redress as a...
Daria Kostecka-Jurczyk, Koncentracja w formie wspólnego przedsiębiorstwa a ryzyko konkurencyjne w świetle prawa antymonopolowego [The concentration in the form of a joint venture and the competition risk in the light of antimonopoly law],C.H. Beck, Warsaw 2017, 304 p.
Joint ventures may create risks for competition. Those risks may be carried by the very structure of the relevant market, or the creation of conditions fostering the coordination of the market conduct of a joint venture...
Piotr Semeniuk, Koncepcja jednego organizmu gospodarczego w prawie ochrony konkurencji [The Concept of a Single Economic Unit in Competition Law], University of Warsaw Faculty of Management Press, Warsaw 2015, 325 p. (book review)
The book under review here provides a very broad analysis of the concept of a single economic unit. The analysis refers either to many aspects of substantive rules of competition law (among them, the a...
Open Access Competition in the Long-Distance Passenger Rail Services in Poland
This paper presents evidence of the head-on open access competition which took place on the market of long-distance passenger rail services in Poland in 2009–2015. The regional governments-owned challenger managed to rai...