Competition Act, 2002
|
Right of action for breaches of competition rules. |
14.—(1) Any person who is aggrieved in consequence of any agreement, decision, concerted practice or abuse which is prohibited under section 4 or 5 shall have a right of action under this subsection for relief against either or both of the following, namely— | |
(a) any undertaking which is or has at any material time been a party to such an agreement, decision or concerted practice or has done any act that constituted such an abuse, | ||
(b) any director, manager or other officer of such an undertaking, or a person who purported to act in any such capacity, who authorised or consented to, as the case may be, the entry by the undertaking into, or the implementation by it of, the agreement or decision, the engaging by it in the concerted practice or the doing by it of the act that constituted the abuse. | ||
(2) The Authority shall have a right of action under this subsection in respect of an agreement, decision or concerted practice or an abuse which is prohibited under section 4 or 5 or by Article 81 or 82 of the Treaty. | ||
(3) Subject to subsection (4), an action under subsection (1) or (2) may be brought in the Circuit Court or in the High Court. | ||
(4) Where an action under subsection (1) is brought in the Circuit Court any relief by way of damages, including exemplary damages, shall not, except by consent of the necessary parties in such form as may be provided for by rules of court, be in excess of the limit of the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in an action founded on tort. | ||
(5) Without prejudice to subsection (7), the following reliefs, or any of them, may be granted to the plaintiff in an action under subsection (1): | ||
(a) relief by way of injunction or declaration, | ||
(b) damages, including exemplary damages. | ||
(6) Without prejudice to subsection (7), relief by way of injunction or declaration may be granted to the Authority in an action under subsection (2). | ||
(7) Where in an action under subsection (1) or (2) it is finally decided by the Court that an undertaking has, contrary to section 5 , abused a dominant position, the Court may, either at its own instance or on the application of the Authority, by order either— | ||
(a) require the dominant position to be discontinued unless conditions specified in the order are complied with, or | ||
(b) require the adjustment of the dominant position, in a manner and within a period specified in the order, by a sale of assets or otherwise as the Court may specify. | ||
(8) Where in an action under subsection (1) or (2) it is proved that the act complained of was done by an undertaking it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that each (if any) director of the undertaking and person employed by it whose duties included making decisions that, to a significant extent, could have affected the management of the undertaking, and any other person who purported to act in any such capacity at the material time, consented to the doing of the said act. | ||
(9) In an action under subsection (1) for damages, it shall be a good defence to prove that the act complained of was done pursuant to a determination made or a direction given by a statutory body. |