¹ These agreements are in principle forbidden and declared void if they affect trade and have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the EU/UK market: article 101 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”), formerly article 81 of the EC Treaty, and Chapter I/Prohibition of the Competition Act 1998.

² The abuse of dominance by one or more undertakings within the EC/UK market is prohibited under article 102 TFEU (ex article 82 EC) and Chapter II/Prohibition of the Competition Act 1998. In this paper references are made to articles 81 and 82 EC as this is still the conventional numbering.

³ I.e., the EC Commission (Competition Directorate). In the UK, the Office of Fair Trading (“OFT”) or, in the last instance, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”).

⁴ Lumley v. Gye (1853) 118 E.R. 749 (hereinafter, “Lumley-tort”).

⁵ Alternatively called “causing economic loss by using unlawful means” (OBG v. Allan, Douglas v. Hello! & Mainstream v. Young [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [6], Lord Hoffmann), “three party unlawful interference with another's business or trade” (ibid, at [141], Lord Nicholls), “intentional-harm tort” (Sales, P. and Stilitz, D., “Intentional Infliction of Harm by Unlawful Means” (1999) 115 L.Q.R. 411Google Scholar) or, more concisely here, “unlawful-interference tort”.

⁶ Van Gend en Loos v. Neder-Landse Tariefcommissie case 26/62 [1963] E.C.R. 1.

⁷ BRT v. SABAM case 127/73 [1974] 2 C.M.L.R. 238.

⁸ Valor International Ltd. v. Application des Gaz S.A. [1978] 3 C.M.L.R. 87, 100, Roskill L.J.

⁹ Application des Gaz S.A. v. Falks Veritas Ltd. [1974] Ch. 381, 396, Lord Denning M.R.

¹⁰ Barretts & Baird v. Institution of Professional Civil Servants [1987] I.R.L.R. 3, 5, Henry J.

¹¹ [1984] 1 A.C. 130.

¹² Ibid, 141.

¹³ E.g., Bourgoin S.A. v. Ministry of Agriculture [1986] 1 Q.B. 716, 787, Parker L.J. It is noteworthy that the first instance decision in Garden Cottage Foods, restored by the House of Lords, had been the work of the then Parker J.

¹⁴ X v. Bedforshire CC [1995] 2 A.C. 633, 731, Lord Browne-Wilkinson.

¹⁵ Buckley, R., “Liability in Tort for Breach of Statutory Duty” (1984) 100 L.Q.R. 204Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Ex p. Island Records [1978] Ch. 122, 135, 137.

¹⁷ Lonrho Ltd v. Shell Petroleum Co (No. 2) [1982] A.C. 173, 183, 187.

¹⁸ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [57], Lord Hoffmann.

¹⁹ E.g., Cutler v. Wandsworth Stadium Ld. [1949] A.C. 398, 407, Lord Simonds; South Australia Asset Management Corporation v. York Montague Ltd [1997] A.C. 191, 211, Lord Hoffmann.

²⁰ Competition Act 1998, as amended by the Enterprise Act 2002, s. 47A.

²¹ Crehan v. Inntrepreneur Pub Co (CPC) [2004] E.W.C.A. Civ. 637, at [156], [167], Gibson L.J.

²² HJ Banks & Co v. British Coal Corp. case C-128/92 [1994] 5 C.M.L.R. 30, at [26], [45], [53], Van Gerven (Advocate-General).

²³ Case c-453/99 [2002] Q.B. 507.

²⁴ [2002] Q.B. 507, at [32]–[36].

²⁵ Smith v. Cammell [1940] A.C. 242, 258, Lord Atkin.

²⁶ See note 15 above; R. Buckley, The Law of Negligence, 4th ed (London 2005), p. 351.

²⁷ Stanton, K., “New Forms of the Tort of Breach of Statutory Duty” (2004) 120 L.Q.R. 324Google Scholar.

²⁸ See note 12 above; R. v. Secretary of State for Transport ex. p. Factortame Ltd (No. 6) [2001] 1 W.L.R. 942.

²⁹ K. Stanton, P. Skidmore, M. Harris and J. Wright, Statutory Torts (London 2003), pp. 269–270, 411 ff.

³⁰ Manfredi v. Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni SpA Joined Cases C-295/04 through C-298/04 [2006] E.C.R. I-6619.

³¹ Hoskins, M., “Garden Cottage Revisited: The Availability of Damages in the National Courts for Breaches of the EEC Competition Rules” (1992) 13 E.C.L.R. 257Google Scholar.

³² P. Cane, Atiyah's Accidents, Compensation and the Law, 7th ed (Cambridge 2006), p. 93.

³³ Whish, R., “The Enforcement of EC Competition Law in the Domestic Courts of Member States” (1994) 15 E.C.L.R. 60Google Scholar, p. 65.

³⁴ R. Thompson and J. O'Flaherty, “Article 82” in P. Roth and V. Rose (eds.), Bellamy & Child European Community Law of Competition, 6th ed (Oxford 2008), ch. 10, p. 1447.

³⁵ U.S. v. Carroll Towing 159 F.2d 169, 173, 2d.Cir (1947) Hand J.

³⁶ E.g., Wagon Mound (No.2) [1967] 1 A.C. 617.

³⁷ S. Shavell, Economic Analysis of Accident Law (Cambridge Mass. 1987), pp. 9 ff, 31–32.

³⁸ E. Weinrib, Idea of Private Law (Cambridge Mass. 1995), p. 189.

³⁹ Fletcher, G., “Fairness and Utility in Tort Theory” (1972) 85 H.L.R. 537CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pp. 542, 550.

⁴⁰ R. Posner, Economic Analysis of Law, 6th ed (New York 2003), pp. 178–179.

⁴¹ D. Owen, “The Fault Pit” (1992) Ga.L.Rev. 703, pp. 719 ff.

⁴² R. Epstein, “A Theory of Strict Liability” (1973) 2 J. L.S. 151.

⁴³ S. Perry, “The Impossibility of General Strict Liability” in J. Feinberg and J. Coleman (eds.), Philosophy of Law. Part III (Belmont Calif. 2004), 612–630.

⁴⁴ J. Fleming, The Law of Torts 9th ed. (Sidney 1998), p. 193.

⁴⁵ Seavey, W., “Principles of Torts” (1942) 56 H.L.R. 72CrossRefGoogle Scholar, p. 84.

⁴⁶ Cane, P., “Justice and Justifications for Tort Liability” (1982) 2 O.J.L.S. 30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ C. Jones, Private Enforcement of Antitrust Law in the EU, UK and USA (Oxford 1999), p. 118.

⁴⁸ Landes, W. and Posner, R., “An Economic Analysis of Intentional Torts” (1981) 1 Int'l Rev.L.&Econ. 127CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁹ Epstein, R., “A Common Law for Labour Relations: A Critique of the New Deal Labor Legislation” (1983) 92 Y.L.J. 1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pp. 1368 ff; Ellis, D., “An Economic Theory of Intentional Torts: A Comment” (1983) 3 Int'l Rev.L.&Econ. 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁰ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [62], Lord Hoffmann.

⁵¹ See notes 189 ff and accompanying text.

⁵² R. Whish, Competition Law, 6th ed (Oxford 2008), pp. 189, 731.

⁵³ Claymore Dairies Ltd v. OFT [2005] CAT 30, at [270].

⁵⁴ Compagnie Maritime Belge Transports SA v. Commission Cases C-395/95 & C-396/95 [2004] C.M.L.R. 1076 ECJ, at [117], [132] (Advocate General Fennelly).

⁵⁵ Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation 475 U.S. 574 (1986), 594, Powell J.

⁵⁶ (1889) L.R. 23 Q.B.D. 598, [1892] A.C. 25.

⁵⁷ McGee, J., “Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil (N.J.) Case” (1958) 1 J.L.E. 137CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁸ 107 Minn. 145 (1909).

⁵⁹ Epstein, R., “Intentional Harms” (1975) 4 J.L.S. 391CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁰ Shapiro, G., “The Prima Facie Tort Doctrine: Acknowledging the Need for Judicial Scrutiny of Malice” (1983) 63 B.U.L.Rev. 1101Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Perlman, H., “Interference with Contract and other Economic Expectancies: A Clash of Tort and Contract Doctrine” (1982) 49 U.Chi.L.Rev. 61, pp. 95CrossRefGoogle Scholarff.

⁶² AKZO v. Commission Case C-62/86 [1993] 5 C.M.L.R. 215, at [72].

⁶³ E.g., Aberdeen Journals v. OFT [2003] CAT 11, at [356].

⁶⁴ Areeda, P. and Turner, D., “Predatory Pricing and Related Practices Under Section 2 of the Sherman Act” (1975) 88 H.L.R. 697CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf: Easterbrook, F., “Predatory Strategies and Counterstrategies” (1981) 48 U.Chi.L.Rev. 263CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁵ Tetra Pak International SA v. Commission Case C-333/94P [1997] 4 C.M.L.R. 662, at [44]. Cf: Carter Holt Harvey Building Products Group Ltd v. The Commerce Commission [2004] U.K.P.C. 37, at [67], Lord Hope (demanding proof that the defendant exercised its market power in the long term); Whish, note 52 above, p. 736.

⁶⁶ Steiner, J., “How to Make the Action Suit the Case: Domestic Remedies for Breach of EEC Law” (1987) 12 E.L.Rev. 102Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ T. Weir, A Casebook on Tort Law, 10th ed (London 2004), p. 598.

⁶⁸ M. Brealey and M. Hoskins, Remedies in EC law: Law and Practice in the English and EC Courts, 2nd ed (London 1998), pp. 126–127.

⁶⁹ Jones, note 47 above, p. 121.

⁷⁰ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [45] ff, Lord Hoffmann.

⁷¹ Revenue and Customs Commissioners v. Total Network SL [2008] 1 A.C. 1174.

⁷² Associated British Ports v. Transport and General Workers' Union [1989] 3 All E.R. 796 (overruled by the HL on different reasons: [1989] 1 W.L.R. 939); Sales, P., “The Tort of Conspiracy and Civil Secondary Liability” (1990) 49 C.L.J. 491, pp. 504–505Google Scholar.

⁷³ Holleran v. Daniel Thwaites Plc [1989] 2 C.M.L.R. 917, at [51]–[52].

⁷⁴ Carty, H., “Joint Tortfeasance and Assistance Liability” (1999) 19 L.S. 489, pp. 494–495Google Scholar, 506.

⁷⁵ Montgomery v. Thompson [1891] A.C. 217, 220, Lord Herschell; AG Spalding & Bros v. AW Gamage Ltd [1914–15] All E.R. Rep.147, 149, Lord Parker; Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd. v. Pub Squash Co. Pty Ltd [1981] 1 W.L.R. 193, 205, Lord Scarman.

⁷⁶ Reddaway v. Banham [1896] A.C. 199.

⁷⁷ P. Cane, The Anatomy of Tort Law (Oxford 1997), pp. 45 ff, 146.

⁷⁸ J Bollinger SA v. Costa Brava Wine Co. Ltd. [1960] Ch. 262, 274, Danckwerts J.

⁷⁹ Waller, S., “The Incoherence of Punishment in Antitrust” (2003) 78 Chicago-Kent Law Review 207Google Scholar.

⁸⁰ H. Carty, An Analysis of the Economic Torts (Oxford 2001), pp. 39 ff; S. Deakin, A. Johnston and B. Markesinis, Markesinis and Deakin's Tort Law, 6th ed (Oxford 2007), p. 603.

⁸¹ P. Cane, Tort Law and Economic Interests, 2nd ed. (Oxford 1996).

⁸² Sir F. Pollock, The Law of Torts: A Treatise on the Principles of Obligations Arising from Civil Wrongs in the Common Law (London 1887), pp. 129–130; P. Birks, “The Concept of a Civil Wrong”, in D. Owen (ed.), Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law (Oxford 1995), ch. 1, p. 38.

⁸³ Conversely, the tort of breach of statutory duty (from which the competition torts stemmed) triggers liability for pure economic loss: London Passenger Transport Board v. Upson [1949] A.C. 155, 168–169, Lord Wright.

⁸⁴ Perry, S., “Protected Interests and Undertakings in the Law of Negligence” (1992) 42 U.T.L.J. 247CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pp. 263ff; Abraham, K., “The Trouble with Negligence” (2001) 54 Vand.L.Rev. 1187Google Scholar; Benson, P., “The Problem with Pure Economic Loss” (2009) 60 S.C.L.Rev. 823, pp. 867Google Scholar ff.

⁸⁵ Stapleton, J., “Comparative Economic Loss: Lesson from Case-Law-Focused ‘Middle Theory’” (2002) 50 UCLA L.Rev. 531Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Third parties owe no duty not to interfere with that freedom: Hohfeld, W., “Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning” (1913) 23 Y.L.J. 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁷ H.L.A. Hart, “Bentham on Legal Rights” in A.W.B. Simpson (ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, Second Series (Oxford 1973), ch. 7, pp. 180–181.

⁸⁸ See note 60 above and accompanying text.

⁸⁹ Cane, note 77 above, pp. 57–58, 152.

⁹⁰ [1898] A.C. 1.

⁹¹ Pollock, note 82 above, p. 129; Holmes, O.W., “Privilege, Malice, and Intent” (1894) 8 H.L.R. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹² Sir Pollock, F., “Allen v Flood” (1898) 14 L.Q.R. 129Google Scholar.

⁹³ Vegelahn v. Guntner 44 N.E. 1077 (1896), 1080–81, Holmes J.

⁹⁴ Aikens v. Wisconsin 195 U.S. 194 (1904), 204, Holmes J.; W. Landes and R. Posner, The Economic Structure of Tort Law (Cambridge Mass. 1987), pp. 111–112.

⁹⁵ U.S. v. Aluminium Co. of America 148 F.2d 416 (1945), 430, Hand J.

⁹⁶ Leigh and Sillivan Ltd. v. Aliakmon Shipping Co. Ltd. [1985] Q.B. 350, 393, Goff L.J. Similarly: Home Office v. Dorset Yatch Co. Ltd. [1970] A.C. 1004, 1027, Lord Reid.

⁹⁷ Brown Shoe Co. v. U.S. 370 U.S. 294 (1962), 320, Warren C.J.

⁹⁸ Wood, D., “Unfair Trade Injury: A Competition-based Approach” (1989) 41 Stan.L.Rev. 1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁹ R. Bork, The Antitrust Paradox. A Policy at War with Itself, 2nd ed (New York 1993), pp. 7 ff.

¹⁰⁰ Hoffmann La Roche v. Commission Case 85/76 [1979] 3 C.M.L.R. 211; Albion Water v. DG Water Services [2005] CAT 40, at [262].

¹⁰¹ See note 90 above.

¹⁰² Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II–II, qu. 64, art. 7.

¹⁰³ J. Bentham, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1781), edited by J.H. Burns and H.L.A. Hart (New York 1996), ch. 8, §6, p. 86, ch. 9, §17, p. 94; Boyle, J.M., “Toward Understanding the Principle of Double Effect” (1980) 90 Ethics 527CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰⁴ H.L.A. Hart, Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law 2nd ed (New York 2008), p. 120; Quinn, W., “Actions, Intentions, and Consequences: The Doctrine of Double Effect” (1989) 18 Phil.& Pub.Aff. 334Google ScholarPubMed.

¹⁰⁵ K. Gibson, Ethics and Business. An Introduction (Cambridge 2007).

¹⁰⁶ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [62]–[63], Lord Hoffmann; at [164]–[165], Lord Nicholls.

¹⁰⁷ Ibid, at [134], Lord Hoffmann.

¹⁰⁸ Ibid, at [166]–[167], Lord Nicholls.

¹⁰⁹ Three Rivers DC v. Bank of England (No. 3) [2003] 2 A.C. 1, 192, Lord Steyn; 235, Lord Millett.

¹¹⁰ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [191], Lord Nicholls.

¹¹¹ Ibid, at [43], Lord Hoffmann (overruling Millar v. Bassey [1994] E.M.L.R. 44).

¹¹² Ibid, at [59]–[60], [134]–[135].

¹¹³ Carty, H., “The Economic Torts in the 21st Century” (2008) 124 L.Q.R. 641Google Scholar, pp. 653ff.

¹¹⁴ (1966) 40 A.L.J.R. 211.

¹¹⁵ Dworkin, G. and Harari, A., “The Beaudesert Decision – Raising the Ghost of the Action upon the Case” (1967) 40 ALJ 296Google Scholar, p. 347.

¹¹⁶ Northern Territory of Australia v. Mengel (1995) 69 A.L.J.R. 527.

¹¹⁷ See note 17 above, at 188, Lord Diplock.

¹¹⁸ Deakin, S. and Randall, J., “Rethinking the Economic Torts” (2009) 72 M.L.R. 519CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹⁹ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [59]–[60], [134]–[135].

¹²⁰ Ibid, at [43].

¹²¹ See notes 118–119 above.

¹²² J. Salmond, Jurisprudence, 9th ed. by James Parker (London 1937), pp. 518 ff; J. Finnis: “Intention and Side-effects', in R.G. Frey and C. Morris (eds.), Liability and Responsibility. Essays in Law and Morals (Cambridge 1991), ch. 2; “Intention in Tort Law”, in Owen, note 82 above, ch. 10.

¹²³ Sorrell v. Smith [1925] A.C. 700, 742, Lord Sumner.

¹²⁴ Douglas v. Hello! [2006] Q.B. 125, at [159], [166], [213]–[214], [223]–[225], [236], Lord Phillips M.R.

¹²⁵ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [130]–[136].

¹²⁶ See note 113 above.

¹²⁷ See note 118 above.

¹²⁸ G.E. Anscombe, Intention 2nd ed (Oxford 1963), pp. 44–45.

¹²⁹ Brian C.J., Y.B.17 Edw.IV, 1.

¹³⁰ Lord Halsbury L.C., South Wales Miners' Federation v. Glamorgan Coal Company Ltd. [1905] A.C. 239, 244.

¹³¹ See note 118 above, pp. 539–540.

¹³² Bayley J., R v. Harvey (1823) 107 E.R. 379 (1823).

¹³³ G. Williams, “Oblique Intention” [1987] C.L.J. 417.

¹³⁴ D. Howarth, “Is There a Future for the Intentional Torts?” in P. Birks (ed.), The Classification of Obligations (Oxford 1997), ch. 9.

¹³⁵ Howarth, D., “Against Lumley v. Gye” (2005) 68 M.L.R. 195CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹³⁶ T. Weir, “The Staggering March of Negligence” in P. Cane and J. Stapleton (eds.), The Law of Obligations. Essays in Celebration of John Fleming (Oxford 1998), ch. 5, p. 117.

¹³⁷ Neyers, J., “Rights-based Justifications for the Tort of Unlawful Interference with Economic Relations” (2008) 28 L.S. 215, pp. 224–225Google Scholar.

¹³⁸ R. Whish, “Control of Cartels and other Anti-competitive Agreements” in V. Dhall (ed.), Competition Law Today: Concepts, Issues, and the Law in Practice (Oxford 2007), ch. 1, pp. 50–51.

¹³⁹ Salop, S. and White, L., “Economic Analysis of Private Antitrust Litigation” (1986) 74 Geo.L.J. 1001Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁰ See note 55 above.

¹⁴¹ Whish, note 52 above, pp. 115 ff, 335–336.

¹⁴² Consten and Gruding v. Commission Cases 56/64 & 58/64 [1966] C.M.L.R. 418.

¹⁴³ Northern Pacific Railway Company v. U.S. 356 U.S. 1 (1957), 5, Black J.

¹⁴⁴ Kenny, A., “Intention and Purpose” (1966) 63 J.Phil. 642CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴⁵ Compagnie Royale Asturienne des Mines S.A. v. Commission Cases 29-30/83 [1985] 1 C.M.L.R. 688, at [26].

¹⁴⁶ Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. U.S. 221 U.S. 1 (1911).

¹⁴⁷ E.g., Institute of Independent Insurance Brokers v. DGFT [2001] CAT 4, at [169]–[171].

¹⁴⁸ O. Odudu, The Boundaries of EC Competition Law. The Scope of Article 81 (New York 2006), pp. 114 ff.

¹⁴⁹ Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. U.S. 246 U.S. 231 (1918), 238, Brandeis J.

¹⁵⁰ W. Van Gerven, “Private Enforcement of EC Competition Rules in the ECJ-Courage v. Crehan and the Way Ahead” in J. Basedow (ed.), Private Enforcement of EC Competition Law (Netherlands 2007), 19–38.

¹⁵¹ Sherman Act 1890, s. 5(a).

¹⁵² Competition Act 1998, s. 58A.

¹⁵³ J. Lever, “Effective Private Enforcement of RC Antitrust Rules substantive Remedies: The viewpoint of an English Lawyer” in C–D. Ehlermann and I. Atanasiu (eds.), European Competition Law Annual 2000: The Modernisation of EC Antitrust Policy (Oxford 2001), 109–117.

¹⁵⁴ Holmes, K., “Public Enforcement or Private Enforcement? Enforcement of Competition Law in the EC and UK” (2004) 25 E.C.L.R. 25Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁵ Jacobs, F., “Civil Enforcement of EEC Antitrust Law” (1984) 82 Mich.L.Rev. 1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵⁶ Arkin v. Borchard Lines [2005] EWCA Civ. 655.

¹⁵⁷ R. Nazzini, Concurrent Proceedings in Competition Law (New York 2004), pp. 79 ff.

¹⁵⁸ Frank J., Associated Industries of New York State, Inc. v. Ickes 134 F.2d 694 (2^nd Cir. 1943), 704.

¹⁵⁹ E. Paulis, “Policy issues in the Private Enforcement of EC Competition Law” in Basedow, note 146 above, 7–16.

¹⁶⁰ I.e., in Inntrepreneur Estates Ltd. v. Mason [1993] 2 C.M.L.R. 293.

¹⁶¹ Rodger, B.: “Private Enforcement of Competition Law, the Hidden Story: Competition Litigation Settlements in the United Kingdom, 2000–2005” (2008) 29 E.C.L.R. 96, p.115Google Scholar; “Competition Law Litigation in the UK Courts” (2006) E.C.L.R. 241, 279, 341.

¹⁶² Clayton Act 1914, s. 4, §§ 12–27.

¹⁶³ Posner, note 40 above, p. 328.

¹⁶⁴ Civil Procedure Rules, 44.3.(2)(a).

¹⁶⁵ Snyder, E. and Kauper, T., “Misuse of the Antitrust Laws: The Competitor Plaintiff” (1991) 90 Mich.L.Rev. 551, pp. 596 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶⁶ Wireless Group Plc v. Radio Joint Audience Research Ltd. [2005] U.K.C.L.R. 203, at [53], Lloyd J.

¹⁶⁷ Callery v. Gray [2001] EWCA Civ. 1117.

¹⁶⁸ Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, ss. 58, 58A.

¹⁶⁹ See, e.g., Austin, A., “Negative Effects of Treble Damage Actions: Reflections on the New Antitrust Strategy” (1978) Duke L.J. 1353Google Scholar; Baumol, W. and Ordover, J., “Use of Antitrust to Subvert Competition Antitrust and Economic Efficiency” (1985) 28 J.L.E. 247CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷⁰ Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc. 429 U.S. 477 (1977).

¹⁷¹ Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois 431 U.S. 720 (1977).

¹⁷² Associated General Contractors of California v. California State Council of Carpenters 459 U.S. 519 (1983).

¹⁷³ Page, W., “The Scope of Liability for Antitrust Violations” (1985) 37 Stan.L.Rev. 1445CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷⁴ Crane, D., “Optimizing Private Antitrust Enforcement” (2010) 63 Vand.L.Rev. 675, p. 686Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁵ Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe Machinery Corp. 392 U.S. 481 (1968).

¹⁷⁶ Landes, W. and Posner, R., “Should Indirect Purchasers Have Standing to Sue under the Antitrust Laws – An Economic Analysis of the Rule of Illinois Brick” (1979) 46 U.Chi.L.Rev. 602CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷⁷ Ceniz, F., “Antitrust Damages Actions: Lessons for American Indirect Purchasers' Litigation” (2010) 59 I.C.L.Q. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁷⁸ As suggested in Kleinwort Benson Ltd. v. Birmingham CC [1997] Q.B. 380 and resolved in Marks &Spencer Plc v. Commissioners of Customs and Excise [1999] 1 C.M.L.R. 1152.

¹⁷⁹ R. Epstein, Cases and Materials on Torts, 9th ed (New York 2008), p. 1255.

¹⁸⁰ D. Beard, “Damages in Competition Law Litigation” in T. Ward and K. Smith (eds.), Competition Litigation in the UK (London 2005), ch. 7, pp. 274 ff.

¹⁸¹ BCL Old v. Aventis [2005] CAT 2.

¹⁸² Petrucci, C., “The Issues of the Passing-on Defence and Indirect Purchasers' Standing in European Competition Law” (2008) 29 E.C.L.R. 96Google Scholar.

¹⁸³ Jacobs, note 155 above, pp. 1368, 1374; P. Areeda and L. Kaplow, Antitrust Analysis: Problems, Text, Cases, 5th ed (New York 1997), p. 74.

¹⁸⁴ Atiyah, P., “Negligence and Economic Loss” (1967) 83 L.Q.R. 248Google Scholar, p. 270.

¹⁸⁵ Rizzo, M., “A Theory of Economic Loss in the Law of Torts” (1982) 11 J.L.S. 281CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸⁶ Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. 327 U.S. 251 (1946), 264–265, Stone, C.J.

¹⁸⁷ Enron Coal Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v. English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd [2009] CAT 36.

¹⁸⁸ Ibid, particularly at [41]–[42], [45], [47], [165].

¹⁸⁹ Lord Blackburn, Livingstone v. Rawyards Coal Co. (1880) 5 App.Cas 25, 39; T. Weir, “Complex Liabilities” in A. Tunc (chief ed.), International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law (Tübingen 1976), vol. 11, ch. 12, p. 5.

¹⁹⁰ Cane, P., “Mens Rea in Tort Law” (2000) 20 O.J.L.S. 533CrossRefGoogle Scholar, p. 548.

¹⁹¹ [2008] 1 A.C. 1, at [60]–[62], Lord Hoffmann.

¹⁹² Williams, G., “The Aims of the Law of Tort” (1951) C.L.P. 137Google Scholar, p. 138.

¹⁹³ Goldberg, J., “Twentieth-century Tort Theory” (2003) 91 Geo.L.J. 513Google Scholar.

¹⁹⁴ G. Postema, “Introduction: Search for an Explanatory Theory of Torts” in G. Postema (ed.), Philosophy and the Law of Torts (Cambridge 2001), ch. 1.

¹⁹⁵ Weinrib, note 38 above.

¹⁹⁶ J. Coleman, Risks and Wrongs (New York 1992).

¹⁹⁷ Fletcher, G., “Corrective Justice for Moderns” (1993) 106 H.L.R. 1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹⁸ Neyers, J., “The Economic Torts as Corrective Justice” (2009) 17 Torts L.J. 1Google Scholar.

¹⁹⁹ Shavell, note 37 above, p. 297.

²⁰⁰ Coleman, note 196 above, pp. 198, 371; A. Beever, “Justice and Punishment in Tort: A Comparative Theoretical Analysis” in Ch. Rickett (ed.), Justifying Private Law Remedies (Portland 2008), ch. 11.

²⁰¹ Reich, N., “The ‘Courage’ Doctrine: Encouraging or Discouraging Compensation for Antitrust Injuries” (2005) 42 C.M.L. Rev. 35Google Scholar.

²⁰² Snyder and Kauper, note 165 above.

²⁰³ R. Robin, “Past as Prelude: The Legacy of Five Landmarks of Twentieth-Century Injury Law for the Future of Torts” in S. Madden (ed.), Exploring Tort Law (Cambridge 2005), ch. 2.

²⁰⁴ Chapman, B. and Trebilcock, M., “Punitive Damages: Divergence in Search of a Rationale” (1989) 40 Ala.L.Rev. 742Google Scholar.

²⁰⁵ Sharkey, C., “Punitive Damages as Societal Damages” (2003) 113 Y.L.J. 347CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pp. 358, p. 364.

²⁰⁶ State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003).

²⁰⁷ Ellis, D., “Fairness and Efficiency in the Law of Punitive Damages” (1982) 56 S.Cal.L.Rev. 1Google Scholar.

²⁰⁸ Breit, W. and Elzinga, K., “Antitrust Enforcement and Economic Efficiency: The Uneasy Case for Treble Damages” (1974) 17 J.L.E. 329CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁰⁹ C. Beccaria, Of Crimes and Punishments (1764), trans. by J. Grigson (New York 1996), pp. 49–50; Bentham, note 103 above, ch. 14, §8, p. 166; Sharkey, note 205 above.

²¹⁰ Becker, G., “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach” (1968) 76 J.Pol.Econ. 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²¹¹ Cooter, R., “Economic Analysis of Punitive Damages” (1982) 56 S.Cal.L.Rev. 79Google Scholar.

²¹² Landes, W. and Posner, R., “The Private Enforcement of the Law” (1975) 4 J.Leg.Stud. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²¹³ Polinsky, M. and Shavell, S., “Punitive Damages: An Economic Analysis” (1998) H.L.R. 869, pp. 954–955Google Scholar.

²¹⁴ Hylton, K., “Punitive Damages and the Economic Theory of Penalties” (1998) 87 Geo.L.J. 421Google Scholar.

²¹⁵ Morris, C., “Punitive Damages in Tort Cases” (1931) 44 H.L.R. 1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Birks, note 82 above, p. 37; J. Edelman, “In Defence of Exemplary Damages” in Rickett, note 200 above, ch. 10.

²¹⁶ D. Owen, “Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law” in Owen, note 82 above, ch. 9, pp. 205, 219 ff.

²¹⁷ Lancashire CC v. Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd. [1997] Q.B. 897.

²¹⁸ Zipursky, B., “A Theory of Punitive Damages” (2005) 84 Tex.L.Rev. 105Google Scholar.

²¹⁹ Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] A.C. 1027, 1039, Lord Hailsham L.C.

²²⁰ [1964] A.C. 1129.

²²¹ Ibid, 1221, 1226–8.

²²² Weinrib, note 38 above, pp. 114, 134–135.

²²³ E.g., Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Company 119 Cal.App.3d 757 (4^th Dist., 1981).

²²⁴ Texaco Inc. v. Pennzoil Co 729 S.W.2d 768 Tex.Ct.App. (1987).

²²⁵ See, for example, Schwartz, G., “Deterrence and Punishment in the Common Law of Punitive Damages: A Comment” (1982) 56 S.Cal.L.Rev. 133Google Scholar; A. Burrows, “Judicial Remedies” in A. Burrows (ed.), English Private Law, 2nd ed (Oxford 2007), ch. 21, pp. 1677–8.

²²⁶ [2008] 2 All E.R. 249, [2009] 3 All E.R. 27.

²²⁷ [2008] 2 All E.R. 249, at [43]–[69].

²²⁸ [2009] 3 All E.R. 27.

²²⁹ Odudu, O. and Virgo, G., “Remedies for Breach of Statutory Duty” (2009) 68 C.L.J. 32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sheehan, D., “Competition Law Meets Restitution for Wrongs” (2009) 125 L.Q.R. 222Google Scholar.

²³⁰ [2008] 2 All E.R. 249, at [19].

²³¹ See note 178 above.

²³² Cane, note 77 above, p. 115.

²³³ Kuddus v. Chief Constable of Leicestershire [2002] 2 A.C. 122, at [66], Lord Nicholls.

²³⁴ Rodger, B., “Private Enforcement and the Enterprise Act: an Exemplary System of Awarding Damages” (2003) 24 E.C.L.R. 103Google Scholar, pp. 109 ff.

²³⁵ Galanter, M. and Luban, D., “Poetic Justice: Punitive Damages and Legal Pluralism” 42 (1993) Am.U.L.Rev. 1393Google Scholar.

²³⁶ Smith New Court Securities Ltd. v. Scrimgeour (Asset Management) Ltd. Vickers [1997] A.C. 254, 280, Lord Steyn.