Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES)
- About Us
- CLES News
- Research Initiatives
- Training and Courses
- CLES Research Paper Series
The CLES is currently planning the following event:
The Challenging Nature of Cartel Criminalisation: A Case Study of the UK
Speaker: Dr Peter Whelan, University of Leeds
3 February 2015
For more information, please go to the events pages.
For general enquiries, please contact:
+44 (0)20 7679 1407
t.wingender [at] ucl.ac.uk
For research project enquiries, please contact:
Dr Ioannis Lianos
+44 (0)20 7679 1028
i.lianos [at] ucl.ac.uk .
- The One and the Many: Elaborating a taxonomy of Impact Assessment practices in Europe by Ioannis Lianos and Mihaly Fazekas
For more working papers, please visit the CLES Research Paper Series section on this website.
Theory and History of Competition Law
- Convened by Dr Ioannis Lianos.
Cycle Economic Evidence
- Convened by Professor Anne-Lise Sibony and Professor Ioannis Lianos
History and Theory of Competition Law Workshops
UCL Laws has launched a programme on "Theory and History of Competition Law" with a number of workshops since November 2009. The objective of the programme is to bridge the gap between theory, history of competition law and practice in Europe, by exploring some core issues of competition law, from an interdisciplinary and a critical legal theory perspective.
The objective is to have small and informal workshops intended mainly for advanced students (LL.Ms), academics and practitioners with theoretical interests.
26 November 2009
||“How useful is economics to understand competition law?"|
In this seminar, two short presentations will focus on how economists of
various schools envisage their contribution to competition law and the
role of economic schools in rationalizing competition law discourse.
Participants will be invited to discuss how these conceptions fit with
lawyers’ notion of the usefulness of economics in this field of law.
Professor Sibony and students
19 January 2010
||"Economic expertise and experts in competition law enforcement: theory and practice."|
Economic evidence has made heavy inroads in competition law enforcement and litigation. The emerging role of economic consultancies in litigation has been the notable result of the more economics-oriented approach in competition law. The emergence of a market for economic experts in Europe may profoundly affect the way economic expertise is integrated in legal proceedings. Common law jurisdictions (e.g. United Kingdom, United States) have traditionally used different mechanisms from civil law jurisdictions (e.g. France, Germany) in order to address the information asymmetry that exists between economic experts and judges and to ensure the objectivity of judicial decision-making. They chose to emphasize the role of the adversarial process (expert witnesses) instead of the quest for a neutral arbiter (court appointed experts), mechanism traditionally chosen by civil law jurisdictions. The need to mitigate this asymmetry of information between judges and economic experts has also led to the development of hybrid mechanisms (e.g. assessors, specialised courts) and to the adoption in the United States (US) of specific rules for the admissibility and the evaluation of economic evidence. The UK Competition Commission, but also most recently the European Commission have adopted best practices governing the submission of economic evidence in their proceedings.
For more information, see Suggested Best Practice for Submissions of Technical Economic Analysis from Parties to the CC available at:
and European Commission Best Practices for the Submission of Economic Evidence available at: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2010_best_practices/
The session will discuss, among other questions, the practical implications of these texts, the issue of expert bias and how to address it, the question of adopting more extensive admissibility standards for economic expertise, as well as the way economic evidence is assessed by courts and competition authorities and the probative value of the different types of economic evidence. For example, are there any types of economic methods and models to which, in your experience, courts are more receptive in the quantification of antitrust damages (comparator-based, financial analysis based or market structure based)? If so, why?
The starting point for the discussion will be a paper on 'Judging' Economists: Economic Expertise in Competition Law Litigation - A European View (September 4, 2009). University College of London Centre for Law and Economics Working Paper No. 01-09.
Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1468502
Cycle Distributive Justice
|13 July 2011||
Competition Law and Distributive Justice:
A Critical State of Play
Dr Amelia Fletcher, Chief Economist, Office of Fair Trading
Professor Kai-Uwe Kühn, Chief economist, DG Competition, European Commission
Dr Jorge Padilla, Senior Managing Director and Head of Compass Lexecon Europe
Professor Richard O. Zerbe
Daniel J Evans, Professor of Public Affairs, University of Washington
Dr Ioannis Lianos, City Solicitors' Educational Trust Reader in European and Competition Law; Director, Centre for Law, Economics and Society, UCL
About this talk:
The debate over the objectives of competition law statutes has recently intensified. There are many reasons for this:
Page last modified on 19 dec 14 15:33