Courts throughout Europe increasingly adopt a minimum damages approach in antitrust cases, unanimously presuming at least a 5% overcharge, driven by grounds of compensation, effectiveness and deterrence. Recent judgments – from the CAT (UK) to the Spanish Supreme Court, Norway’s courts, the Court of Appeal in Stuttgart, the Dieselgate rulings of the German and Austrian Supreme Courts, and finally the European Court of Justice – point to a converging practice and a structured approach to quantifying damages across the EU.
Spanish Supreme Court confirms overcharge in excess of 10% in the trucks cartel: key takeaways from judgment STS 5861/2025
The Supreme Court Judgment STS 5861/2025 of 18 December 2025 represents a significant development in damages litigation arising from the trucks cartel in Spain. The Supreme Court has fully dismissed the appeals brought by Renault Trucks S.A.S., reinforcing a clear judicial trend towards an effective and adequate compensation of anticompetitive harm, based on the facts […]
Dairy Cartel – the next level of private antitrust enforcement: Commercial Court No. 14 of Madrid finds a 9.4% undercharge
On 16 October 2025, Commercial Court No. 14 of Madrid delivered a judgment[1] of notable relevance in the well-known Spanish Dairy Cartel case. The decision, issued by Judge Ms Carmen González Suárez in Ordinary Proceedings No. 588/2022, partially upheld a private damage claim brought against Grupo Lactalis Iberia, S.A. (Lactalis) and Industrias Lácteas de Granada, […]
Decoding Transaction Data in Private Competition Law Damage Litigations: Efficient data management in legal proceedings
In private damage litigations, the effective management of transaction data stands as a pivotal element in building compelling cases. Transaction data plays a central role in the substantiation of a claim, establishing causation, quantifying damages, and pre-emptively addressing defence strategies.
The intricacies of transaction data management present unique challenges, from handling extensive paper-based evidence to ensuring data relevance, integrity, and compliance with data protection regulations. This article explores the complexities of transaction data management within competition law litigations, offering insight into best practices and the evolving landscape of data management technologies.
Challenges in Quantifying Private Antitrust Damages: Addressing Data Availability and Reliability
This article explores the complexities surrounding the quantification of damages and the issue of data asymmetry in private antitrust damage actions in Europe. It delves into the challenges claimants face in quantifying the actual harm caused by anticompetitive behaviour. The article also discusses the role of disclosure rules in promoting fair access to evidence and proposes potential solutions to mitigate the information disparity between claimants and defendants.
Connor and Lande data: median recovery rates suggest that cartel effects can be five times higher than cartel fines
Many cartels remain undetected by competition authorities. Even if detected, the estimated negative effects of price-fixing cartels on prices can be five times larger than the fines imposed by the authorities. That is, the level of fines is suboptimal. The analysis is based on the dataset of Connor and Lande. It partially contradicts the results of a recent study that suggests effective recovery of cartel injuries when cartels are discovered.
Assessing the compatibility of seemingly contradictory statistical evidence in the case of damage estimations (reflections on the article written by Peter Bönisch and Roman Inderst)
In a recent publication, Peter Bönisch and Roman Inderst tackle the delicate issue of the evaluation of seemingly contradictory econometric evidence. Introducing the concept of severity measures, they propose a method to avoid the common obstacles plaguing the interpretation of seemingly conflicting empirical evidence through the practical example of financial damage estimation in follow-on cases. This blog post discusses the ideas presented in the paper.
Antitrust Damages in the Ad-Tech Sector
On 22 June 2021, the European Commission confirmed the opening of a formal antitrust investigation into whether Google previously abused or is currently abusing its dominant position in the online intermediation of programmatic display advertising business. Prior to the Commission’s announcement, the French Competition Authority (FCA) had already handed down a decision on 7 July 2021, including a EUR 220 million fine, finding that Google breached Article 102 TFEU and the French Competition Act in the same advertisement sector.
Les dommages et intérêts dans les affaires de position dominante : l’exemple de Google Shopping
Si une multitude d’actions en réparation sont régulièrement déposées devant les juridictions de divers pays de l’Union européenne en rapport avec l’article 101 TFUE (pensez, par exemple, à l’abondance des litiges contre les constructeurs de camions), il n’en va pas encore de même pour les affaires d’abus de position dominante. Bien que la Directive régissant […]
Paris Court of Appeal provides guidance on damage estimation in competition law cases and awards EUR 250 million in damages
Orange Caraïbe et al. vs Digicel Antilles Françaises Guyane On 17 June 2020, the Paris Court of Appeal (Court) delivered its judgment (Orange judgment) in which it ordered Orange to pay EUR 249.5 million (EUR 181.5 million in damages plus EUR 68 million in interest) to Digicel Antilles and Guyana, following the implementation by the […]