In this issue:
The first part of this issue acknowledges that leniency programs seem to be more popular than ever—but there’s growing doubt as to their future. Our experts from the U.S., Europe, and Brazil explain some of the reasons why. And in the second section, we continue to present case studies of how developing authorities are tackling complex issues—hearing this month from Finland on damages, Mexico on broadcasting, and Ecuador with a first-year report. There are lessons here for both newish and established competition regimes.
-
Leniency Programs
Too Much of a Good Thing?: Is Heavy Reliance on Leniency Eroding Cartel Enforcement in the United States?
But some would argue that a regime wherein cartelists may fear being exposed by their co-conspirators in exchange for leniency, but where they face no real danger of otherwise being detected, is lopsided and thus less effective. Megan Dixon, Ethan Kate, & Janet McDavid (Hogan Lovells LLP)
10 Ways to Preserve the Lustre of Leniency
No one would deny the very obvious financial benefits of leniency. But at the same time there seems to be an unremitting flow of cartel cases. Grant Murray & Douglas Tween (Baker & McKenzie LLP)
The “Discoverability” of Leniency Documents and the Proposed Directive on Damages Actions for Antitrust Infringements
While a variety of factors may explain this trend [decreasing participation], the most worrying one perhaps relates to the increased disclosure risks associated with private damages litigation. Kristina Nordlander & Marc Abenhaïm (Sidley Austin LLP)
Recent Trends in Leniency Agreements in Brazil
Therefore, it is possible to say that CADE has been adopting a more cautious approach when reviewing applications for leniency agreements. Barbara Rosenberg, Marcos Exposto, Sandra Terepins, & Luiz Galvão (Barbosa, Müssnich, & Aragão Advogados)
-
Case Studies from Developing Authorities
The Finnish Asphalt Cartel Court Decision on Damages: An Important EU Precedent and Victory for Plaintiffs
The decision established a reasonable and coherent basis for awarding antitrust damages in Finland and may be influential across the European Union. John M. Connor (Purdue University) & Toni Kalliokoski (Dittmar & Indrenius)
Injecting Competition in Broadcasting through MCMO Regulations: Some Recommendations for Mexico
What was the original market failure that made this regulation necessary? Alexander Elbittar, Ernesto Flores-Roux (CIDE), Elisa Mariscal, (CIDE & Global Economics Group), & Martin Cave (Imperial College London & U.K. Competition Commission)
Lessons from the First Year of Competition Law in Ecuador
Exclusivity is the example into which we will delve deeper due to its importance in the Ecuadorian market. Luis MarÃn-Tobar (Perez Bustamante & Ponce)
