Evidence Standards in EU Competition Enforcement

Andriani Kalintiri is a Lecturer in Law at City, University of London.

Summary of Contents
1. Introduction
I. Evidence Matters in the Spotlight
II. A Simple Question, an Unclear Answer: What Standards Govern the Evaluation of Evidence?
III. Purpose, Approach and Scope
IV. Structure


2. Evidence Standards in EU Competition Enforcement: Autonomous, But Not Independent
I. Introduction
II. A Primer on Evidence Law and Theory
III. Evidence Standards and EU Competition Enforcement
IV. Conclusion


3. The Burden of Proof in EU Competition Enforcement
I. Introduction
II. The Concept of the Burden of Proof and its Significance
III. The Burden of Proof in Antitrust Cases
IV. The Burden of Proof in Merger Cases
V. Conclusion


4. The Standard of Proof in EU Competition Enforcement
I. Introduction
II. The Concept of the Standard of Proof and its Significance
III. The Main Reasons for the Ambivalence Over the Applicable Standard of Proof
IV. The Regulation of the Standard of Proof in Antitrust and Merger Cases
V. The Discharge of the Standard of Proof in EU Competition Enforcement
VI. Conclusion


5. Principles and Problems of Evidence Admissibility and Evaluation
I. Introduction
II. Principles Governing Evidence Admissibility and Evaluation in EU Competition Enforcement
III. Potential Shortcomings in the EU Courts’ Approach to Evidence Admissibility
IV. Potential Shortcomings in the EU Courts’ Approach to Evidence Evaluation
V. Conclusion


6. Presumptions in EU Competition Enforcement
I. Introduction
II. The Concept and Significance of Presumptions
III. Distinguishing Presumptions from Similar Devices in EU Competition Enforcement
IV. The Main Presumptions in EU Competition Enforcement
V. The Implications of the Presumptions Used in EU Competition Enforcement
VI. Conclusion


7. Evidence Standards and Standards of Judicial Review
I. Introduction
II. Standards of Judicial Review and Fairness Concerns
III. The Interplay between Evidence Standards and Standards of Judicial Review
IV. Conclusion
8. Reflections
I. Introduction
II. Some Connotations for the Enforcement System’s Risk Proclivity
III. The Implications for Fairness
IV. The Connotations for the Application of the Substantive Rules
V. The Connotations for the EU Institutions
VI. The Implications for National Procedural Autonomy
VII. Conclusion