UCL CLES and KCL hold major conference on Private Enforcement of EU and UK Competition Law

On 3 June 2025 the UCL Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES), in collaboration with The Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College London, held a high-profile conference on ‘Private Enforcement of EU and UK Competition Law at the Crossroads: Retrospective and Prospective’. This one-day event brought together leading judges, academics, practitioners and policymakers to critically examine the evolution and future of private enforcement mechanisms within EU and UK competition law.

The conference focused on assessing the effectiveness of private enforcement in achieving its dual objectives: compensation and deterrence. Against the backdrop of nearly a decade since the EU Damages Directive (2014/104) and the UK’s Consumer Rights Act 2015, as well as the emergence of new digital regulations (EU Digital Markets Act [DMA]; UK Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act [DMCCA]), the event provided a timely assessment of the current landscape and the challenges ahead.

Lord Bellamy KC delivered the keynote speech offering an insightful account of the evolution of private enforcement in the UK followed by a lively discussion between Damien Geradin (Geradin and Partners), Judge Ulrika Persson (Patent and Market Court of Appeal, Stockholm), Judge Pedraz Calvo (Audiencia National, Court of Appeal, Madrid) and Alex Stratakis (Van Bael & Bellis), masterfully chaired by Professor Rachael Mulheron KC (Hon).

The second panel chaired by Professor Renato Nazzini (KCL) explored ‘Cross-Jurisdictional Challenges’ together with Mario Siragusa (Cleary Gottlieb), Professor Barry Rodger (Strathclyde University), Mihail Danov (University of Exeter), Francisco Marcos (IE Law School), Gabriela Muscolo (Rucellai & Raffaelli Law firm) and Dr Hanna Schröder (Secretary in the Chambers of Advocate General Juliane Kokott, Court of Justice of the European Union). The panel addressed the complexities arising from parallel proceedings in different jurisdictions, particularly concerning the enforcement of both competition and digital regulations.

The third panel chaired by Dr Deni Mantzari (UCL Laws) explored the evolution of theories of harm and the requirements for establishing causation in private enforcement cases with Peter Davis (The Brattle Group), Oliver Latham (Charles River Associates), Stephen Wisking (Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer) and Patrick Teague (Geradin Partners). How do we decide on the correct counterfactual to assume? In many cases there may be disagreement over the precise counterfactual. Given the inherent degree of speculation in counterfactual analysis, how does the relevant standard of proof impact on cases where the counterfactual is uncertain? How do novel theories of harm impact on the counterfactual? Turning to the economic analysis of the counterfactual, how economic principles can be used to help choose between counterfactuals when legal position is unclear. The panelists also highlighted the challenges with quantifying harm in exclusionary abuse cases compared to more traditional cartel cases.

The fourth panel chaired by Professor Ioannis Kokkoris on Quantum explored methodologies for quantifying damages and the role of litigation funding in facilitating private enforcement actions together with Joe Perkins (FTI Consulting), Helen Jenkins (OXERA), Daniel Beard KC (Monckton Chambers) and Stefano Trento (Compass Lexecon).

The fifth panel ‘Funding and Representative Actions in UK Private Enforcement of Competition Law’ chaired by Dr Stavros Makris (UCL Laws) examined the intersection of litigation funding and collective redress mechanisms. This panel brought together Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen, Chris Williams, Elena S Rey and Professor Andreas Stephan to explore the practical realities of securing funding for collective actions, the challenges faced by class representatives, and the evolving relationships between funders, legal teams, and class members. The panelists also considered the impact of recent case law, such as the Riefa judgment, and reflected on broader policy implications for the future of private enforcement. The conversation highlighted how representative actions and litigation funding not only expand access to justice for consumers and businesses, but also complement public enforcement and drive compliance within the UK’s competition law regime.

The penultimate panel, moderated by Professor Ioannis Lianos (UCL Laws), looked to the future of private enforcement of competition law, examining who benefits from the current system. The panel consisted of Andrea Coscelli CBE (Keystone Strategy), Thomas Clark (Which?), Ronan Flanagan (CMA), Miguel Sousa Ferro (Managing Partner at Sousa Ferro & Associados; Professor at Lisbon University Faculty of Law), Nicholas Frey (Freshfields) and Filippo Lancieri (Georgetown Law). Following a short introduction on the evolution of the US regime – which has served as both a template and a cautionary tale for the development of EU and UK private enforcement systems – the panelists explored the goals of the system, particularly compensation and deterrence, and how these can be achieved most cost effectively. The discussion then examined the respective roles of public and private enforcement and their interaction, focusing on how active private enforcement impacts investigations and cases brought forward by national competition authorities, as well as their possible intervention in the process. The panel concluded with a discussion of potential incremental changes concerning the role of various actors in the private enforcement process, litigation costs, litigation funding, and the importance of case management by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).

The conference provided a comprehensive and forward-looking assessment of private enforcement in competition law, highlighting both achievements and ongoing challenges, and fostering dialogue on the future trajectory of collective redress and effective enforcement in the EU and UK.