INTERNATIONAL: GERMANY - CIVIL COMPETITION LAW - EVALUATION OF DAMAGE - BURDEN OF EVIDENCE

Germany: Damage’s evaluation and evidence’s burden in civil competition law

KEYWORDS

Since in 2011, the German Federal Court of Justice has ruled in favour of a company that was an indirect victim of a cartel, actions for damages regarding violations of competition law are becoming more and more important in Germany. German judges usually have recourse to prima facie evidence in favour of the plaintiff. Nevertheless, in order for the judge to estimate the value of the damage, the injured party has to present the facts that allow the presumption of a certain damage. This article highlights the strategies of the German courts and injured parties in order to make the evaluation of their damages more flexible.

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. [1] 1. Damages actions for breach of competition rules are becoming increasingly well known and growing in Germany. In 2011, the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) ended many years of litigation by ruling in favour of the plaintiff in the final instance in a damages action against a carbonless paper manufacturer, a member of a cartel[Judgment of the Federal Court of Justice of 28.6.2011 - KZR 75/10, NJW 2012, 928 - ORWI . ]]. Since that decision, German courts have been considered to be in favour of this type of action. The following principles can now be regarded as valid under German law : – direct victims of undertakings which are members of

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.

 

This document is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties. Non-authorised use of this document constitutes a violation of the publisher's rights and may be punished by up to 3 years imprisonment and up to a € 300 000 fine (Art. L 335-2 Code de la Propriété Intellectuelle). Personal use of this document is authorised within the limits of Art. L 122-5 CPI and DRM protection.