(magistrska naloga)
Manca Kisovec (Author), Klemen Podobnik (Mentor)

Abstract

V sistemu izvrševanja konkurence v Evropski uniji ima javnopravna prisila v primerjavi z zasebnopravnim varstvom v obliki odškodninskih tožb posameznikov bistveno močnejšo vlogo. Pomembno orodje pri odkrivanju in kaznovanju najhujših kršitev konkurenčnega prava javnopravnim organom predstavlja politika prizanesljivosti, ki članom kartela v zameno za njihovo sodelovanje nudi imuniteto pred globo ali pa znižanje kazni. Kljub manjši vlogi zasebnopravnega uveljavljanja konkurence pa se pomen tega krepi in razvija, v luči tega pa se večajo tudi zahteve za vpogled v dokumente, predložene v program prizanesljivosti. Med slednjimi so ključnega pomena izjave podjetij, ki vsebujejo pomembne informacije o kartelu, ki bi zasebnim tožnikom pred sodišči olajšale dokazovanje kršitve. Nedavna sodna praksa glede razkritja dokumentov iz programov prizanesljivosti in sprejetje Direktive o nekaterih pravilih, ki urejajo odškodninske tožbe po nacionalnem pravu za kršitve določb konkurenčnega prava držav članic in Evropske unije, kaže na trend nerazkrivanja tovrstnih dokumentov zasebnim tožnikom in tako delno nakazuje na prevlado javnopravnega izvrševanja konkurence nasproti zasebnopravnemu.

Keywords

konkurenčno pravo;javnopravno izvrševanje konkurence;zasebnopravno uveljavljanje konkurence;program prizanesljivosti;karteli;izjave podjetij;imuniteta;odškodninske tožbe;magistrske diplomske naloge;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization: UL PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [M. Kisovec]
UDC: 346.545(043.2)
COBISS: 15446865 Link will open in a new window
Views: 1594
Downloads: 470
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Disclosure of documents from the leniency programme
Secondary abstract: Public enforcement within the EU system of competition enforcement has a much stronger role compared to private enforcement in the form of actions for damages. Leniency policy, which offers immunity from fines or reduction of fines to members of cartels in exchange for their cooperation, presents an important tool to public bodies in detecting and punishing the most serious violations of competition law. Despite of its marginal role, the meaning of private enforcement is strengthening and evolving and thus requests for access to documents submitted to leniency programmes are increasing. Crucial among the latter are corporate leniency statements, which contain important information about the cartel that would make it easier for private plaintiffs to prove the facts of the infringement in court. The recent case law regarding the disclosure of documents from leniency programmes and the adoption of the Directive on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union points to a trend of non-disclosure of such documents to private litigants and also partly indicates the dominance of public law enforcement towards the private enforcement.
Secondary keywords: public enforcement of competition;private enforcement of competition;leniency program;cartel;corporate statements;immunity;actions for damages;
Type (COBISS): Master's thesis/paper
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Pravna fak.
Pages: IV, 59 f.
ID: 9580754