Damages Actions

Visa and MasterCard claims are “fanciful”, retailers tell UK Supreme Court

Retailers have pushed back against Visa’s and MasterCard’s claims that their interchange fees are exempt from competition law, arguing that any purported benefits must go to merchants – not cardholders – to outweigh the fees’ restriction of competition.

MasterCard: let us “wield a broad axe” to defend conduct

Spanish court approves truck claimant’s damages calculation

Ex-CMA official to represent UK forex claimants

The government always wins: The Tipline for 23 January 2020

Former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart would have turned 105 today. His definition of obscenity – “I know it when I see it” – has been passed down through the ages, but it is not to be overshadowed by his dissenting opinion in Citizen Publishing. There, he took issue with the court’s seven-to-one order finding that a joint operating agreement between two Arizona newspapers violated federal antitrust laws. Justice Stewart said the sole consistency he could find in litigation brought under section 7 of the Clayton Act is that “the government always wins.” Congress has since given newspapers antitrust exemptions for joint operating agreements. 

Ninth Circuit seems open to no-poach appeal

A federal appellate court may be sympathetic to reviving the claims of two former LG employees that accused the company of having an illegal no-poach agreement with Samsung.

The antitrust damages directive: four years on

Today marks four years since the EU antitrust damages directive was signed into law. After years of discussion, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union intended Directive 2014/104 to make it easier for businesses and consumers to claim compensation for overcharges caused by infringements of competition law.

Presumption of parental influence a concern, barrister says

A ruling to allow two UK subsidiaries to be used as anchor defendants in follow-on litigation – on the presumption that they did not act independently of their parent companies – could increase the risk of irreconcilable judgments, a competition barrister has cautioned. Tom Madge-Wyld at GCR Live Competition Litigation

Hausfeld gets a GRIP on Google lawsuits

Plaintiff’s side law firm Hausfeld has teamed up with a public affairs consultancy to set up the Google Redress & Integrity Platform (GRIP), which aims to attract potential clients seeking redress against the technology company over its allegedly anti-competitive practices.


Latest Magazine

0.0.640.467 magazine banner gcr q3 2019 roi 3 326x238
View all issues

Events

Events

GCR Live 9th Annual Antitrust Law Leaders Forum

Events

GCR Live 2nd Annual Pharmaceuticals

GCR Asia - Sign up for free weekly alerts

Insight

Regional Reviews

The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2019

Highlights

United States: Cartels

David Higbee, John Cove, Jessica Delbaum, Djordje Petkoski, Ryan Shores, Todd Stenerson and Mark Weiss

Shearman & Sterling LLP

Brazil: Merger Control

Tito Andrade, Maria Eugênia Novis de Oliveira and Marcos Paulo Verissimo

Machado Meyer

Mexico: Overview

Fernando Carreño and Paloma Alcantra

Von Wobeser y Sierra, SC

Peru: National Institute for the Defence of Free Competition and the Protection of Intellectual Property

Jesús Eloy Espinoza Lozada

Head of the Technical Secretariat of the Commission for the Defence of Free Competition
All Regional Reviews

Know-how

State Aid 2018

Highlights

Introduction

Jacques Derenne and Dimitris Vallindas

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton

Economics in State Aid

Adina Claici and Elisa Pau

Copenhagen Economics
All Know-how

GCR Editorial Calendar

Details on forthcoming features and projects.

Connect with world leading experts at GCR Live