Fairness

In this issue:

Concerns regarding procedural fairness in antitrust actions have assumed global importance, with some well-publicized issues, but we wanted to take a fresh look at a few lesser-known topics. We first asked the U.S. FTC to bring us up to date on current best practices, and then brought in three authorities—Japan, Taiwan, and Australia—to discuss conflicts between these and historical cultural and political practices. We go to the EU to look at another conflict—with the ECHR. And in our Of Special Interest section, Keith Hylton consider some ramifications of the U.S. Actavis decision—the cash transfer away from new-drug investment into covering a litigation tax.

Fairness

Paul O’Brien, Krisztian Katona, Randy Tritell, Jul 15, 2015

Procedural Fairness in Competition Investigations: U.S. FTC Practice and Recent Guidance from the International Competition Network

Recent international discussion on procedural fairness has recognized that fairness benefits the agencies that provide it. Paul O’Brien, Krisztian Katona, & Randolph Tritell (U.S. FTC)

Toshiyuki Nambu, Jul 15, 2015

The Efforts of the JFTC Toward Promoting Procedural Fairness and Transparency in the Investigation Proceedings

The key procedural stage of the JFTC’s investigation process is a newly introduced hearing procedure, which occurs before issuing administrative orders. Toshiyuki NAMBU (Japan Fair Trade Commission)

Diana Tsai, Jul 15, 2015

Procedure

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!