EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

COORDINATING PRIVATE CLASS ACTION AND PUBLIC AGENCY ENFORCEMENT OF ANTITRUST LAW

David Rosenberg and James P. Sullivan

Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 2006, vol. 2, issue 2, 159-187

Abstract: This essay sketches a new approach to ameliorating the problem of coordinating the use of private class actions and public policing to enforce American antitrust law. Achieving the optimal joint level of enforcement from any system that teams public and private law enforcers requires a coordination mechanism to assure not only that each makes the appropriately motivated and proportionate investment of resources and effort, but also that their respective litigation and settlement decisions are properly synchronized and combined. Our proposal addresses this double-sided coordination problem with a sequential enforcement mechanism. In essence, the system would work as follows: (i) total enforcement license initially vests with the public enforcer; (ii) public enforcer auctions private license to enforce a mandatory-litigation class action; (iii) winning bidder retains recovery from class judgment or settlement; (iv) auction proceeds are deposited with and immediately distributed by the court for compensatory purposes; and (v) public enforcer has option to buy back the private license at the winning bid price.Our approach is superior to the current judicial methods of coordination, which are undertaken through a process of applying doctrines of pre-emption, statutory interpretation, and class action prerequisites. These judicial methods are haphazard and are hampered by courts' information deficits. Our approach is also preferable to proposed statutory reforms that would give public authorities exclusive power to prosecute or terminate the class action on their own, or to intervene and exert some control over private enforcement actions. Our approach affords public enforcers these same options to control the use of class actions. Unlike our approach, however, such reform proposals make no attempt to deal with the problem of giving public authorities appropriate incentives in the decision whether to interfere with private enforcement actions.

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhl007 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:2:y:2006:i:2:p:159-187.

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Competition Law and Economics is currently edited by Nicholas Economides, Amelia Fletcher, Michal Gal, Damien Geradin, Ioannis Lianos and Tommaso Valletti

More articles in Journal of Competition Law and Economics from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:2:y:2006:i:2:p:159-187.