Introduction â" Rules That Govern Rules: Evidence, Proof and Judicial Control in Competition Cases
Mel Marquis
Introduction to the Workshop â" Competition enforcement and judicial review in Europe
Presentations
Written contributions
Bruno Lasserre, The European Competition System in Context: Matching Old Constitutional Principles and
New Policy Challenges
Heike Schweitzer, The European Competition Law Enforcement System and the Evolution of Judicial Review
Panel I
The European Commission: Standard of Proof, burden of proof and evaluation of evidence in antitrust and merger cases
Panel II
The European Courts: Standard of proof, burden of proof, standards of review and evaluation of evidence antitrust and merger cases
Written contributions to Panels I and II
I Per Hellstr¶m, A Uniform Standard of Proof in EU Competition Proceedings
II Philip Lowe, Taking Sound Decisions on the Basis of Available Evidence
III Luis Ortiz Blanco, Standards of Proof and Personal Conviction in EU Antitrust and Merger Control Procedures
IV James Venit, Human All Too Human: The Gathering and Assessment of Evidence and the Appropriate Standard of Proof and Judicial Review in Commission Enforcement Proceedings Applying Articles 81 and 82
V Nicholas Forwood, The Commission's "More Economic Approach" â" Implications for the Role of the EU Courts, the Treatment of Economic Evidence and the Scope of Judicial Review
VI Aindrias " Caoimh, Standard of Proof, Burden of Proof, Standards of Review and Evaluation of Evidence in Antitrust and Merger Cases: Perspective of Court of Justice of the European Union
VII Nils Wahl, Standard of Review â" Comprehensive or Limited?
VIII Eric Gippini-Fournier, The Elusive Standard of Proof in EU Competition Cases
IX Fernando Castillo de la Torre, Evidence, Proof and Judicial Review in Cartel Cases
X Ian Forrester, A Bush in Need of Pruning: the Luxuriant Growth of "Light Judicial Review"
XI John Ratliff, Judicial Review in EC competition cases before the European Courts: Avoiding double renvoi
XII Justin Coombs and Jorge Padilla, The Use of Economic Evidence before the Courts of the European Union
Panel III
National competition authorities: standard of proof, burden of proof and evaluation of evidence in antitrust and merger cases
Written contributions to Panel III
I Alberto Heimler, The Legal Significance of Economic Evidence in Antitrust Cases: Some Comments Based on the Italian Experience
II Pieter Kalbfleisch, Standard of Proof, Burden of Proof and Evaluation of Evidence in Antitrust and Merger Cases: A Perspective of the Netherlands Competition Authority
III Jacques Steenbergen, Rules of Evidence in Competition Cases: An NCA Perspective
IV J. Thomas Rosch, Observations on Evidentiary Issues in Antitrust Cases
V Rafael Allendesalazar and Paloma Martnez Lage
Evidence Gathered through Leniency: From the Prisoner's Dilemma to a Race to the Bottom
VI Mario Siragusa, Antitrust and Merger Cases in Italy: Standard of Proof, Burden of Proof and Evaluation of Evidence
VII James Rill and Jaimee Lederman, Evidence in Judicial Review of U.S. Federal Trade Commission and U.S. Department of Justice Merger Cases
VIII Dennis Carlton, How Should Economic Evidence be Presented and Evaluated?
Panel IV
National courts in major jurisdictions: Standard of proof, burden of proof, standards of review and evaluation of evidence in antitrust and merger cases
Written contributions to Panel IV
I Vaughn Walker, Evidence in Competition Cases: An American Trial Judge's Perspective
II Michael Boudin, Evidence and the Formulation of U.S. Antitrust Law
III Kelyn Bacon, Standard of Proof, Standards of Review and Evaluation of Evidence in UK Antitrust and Merger Cases
IV Jochen Burrichter and Hans Logemann, Evaluation of Evidence in National Courts: Reflections from the German Perspective
V Calvin Goldman, Robert Kwinter, Navin Joneja and Chad Leddy, A Canadian Perspective on the Evaluation of Evidence in Antitrust and Merger Cases in the Context of Recent Changes to Canada's Competition Law
VI Barry Hawk and James Keyte, Separating the Wheat from the Chaff: How the U.S. Courts Analyze Antitrust Evidence
