The UK Court of Appeal upholds the High Court’s finding that following an infringement decision by the EU Commission, the appropriate claim is compensatory and not restitutionary damages (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)

The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ruled that restitutionary damages are not generally available in antitrust cases and that, in most cases, compensatory damages [1] provide adequate remedies. Background In 2001, the European Commission adopted a decision [2] finding that a number of undertakings had infringed Article 81(1) EC and Article 53(1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) by participating in a series of separate cartels affecting 12 different markets for vitamin products [3]. The present case arises out of follow-on actions i.e. damages actions by claimants, who had bought vitamins from the manufacturers named in the decision, for compensation suffered as a result of the cartel's activities. In relation to the nature of the damages sought, the

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)

Quotation

Anthony Dawes, The UK Court of Appeal upholds the High Court’s finding that following an infringement decision by the EU Commission, the appropriate claim is compensatory and not restitutionary damages (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis), 19 October 2007, e-Competitions October 2007, Art. N° 22889

Visites 3877

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues