FEB-14(2)

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

Megan Dixon, Ethan Kate, Janet McDavid, Feb 26, 2014

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)

Grant Murray, Douglas Tween, Feb 26, 2014

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)

Marc Abenhaim, Kristina Nordlander, Feb 26, 2014

The “Discoverability” of Leniency Documents and the Proposed Directive on Damages Actions for Antitrust Infringements

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!