Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2127762
 
 

Footnotes (41)



 


 



The Extraordinary Deterrence of Private Antitrust Enforcement: A Reply to Werden, Hammond, and Barnett


Robert H. Lande


University of Baltimore - School of Law

Joshua P. Davis


University of San Francisco - School of Law

August 6, 2012

Antitrust Law Bulletin, Vol. 58, No. 1, p. 173, Spring 2013
Univ. of San Francisco Law Research Paper No. 2012-24

Abstract:     
Our article, "Comparative Deterrence from Private Enforcement and Criminal Enforcement of the U.S. Antitrust Laws," 2011 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 315, documented an extraordinary but usually overlooked fact: private antitrust enforcement deters a significant amount of anticompetitive conduct. Indeed, the article showed that private enforcement "probably" deters even more anticompetitive conduct than the almost universally admired anti-cartel enforcement program of the United States Department of Justice.

In a recent issue of Antitrust Bulletin, Gregory J. Werden, Scott D. Hammond, and Belinda A. Barnett challenged our analysis. They asserted that our comparison “is more misleading than informative.” It is unsurprising that they would question our position, given its heretical nature (not to mention their understandable loyalty to the fine institution that employs them). However, their specific criticisms do not withstand scrutiny. In their Antitrust Bulletin article they offered six separate critiques of our analysis, each of which this response considers and rebuts in turn.

Although our original article considered a large number of factors and requires 71 law review pages, the core of the comparison it undertook is relatively straightforward: The article added together the value of every DOJ anti-cartel sanction from 1990 to 2007, including fines, restitution, and an equivalent value for time spent in detention. This totaled $7.737 billion. The article compared this amount to the $21.9 to 23.9 billion in sanctions resulting from just 40 large private antitrust cases that ended during the same period. On the basis of this and other evidence the article concluded, with appropriate qualifiers, that private enforcement "probably" deters more anticompetitive activity than DOJ anti-cartel enforcement. The article also noted that private enforcement deserves much more praise than it typically receives, not the scorn so frequently given to it by the antitrust field. In this response, we explain why our original conclusions survive the efforts of Werden, Hammond, and Barnett to debunk them.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: regulation, class actions, private litigation, private antitrust litigation, private antitrust enforcement, private antitrust cases, deterrence, criminal antitrust enforcement, compensation, cartels, optimal deterrence, cartel deterrence, antitrust litigation, antitrust damages

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: August 10, 2012 ; Last revised: June 10, 2013

Suggested Citation

Lande, Robert H. and Davis, Joshua P., The Extraordinary Deterrence of Private Antitrust Enforcement: A Reply to Werden, Hammond, and Barnett (August 6, 2012). Antitrust Law Bulletin, Vol. 58, No. 1, p. 173, Spring 2013; Univ. of San Francisco Law Research Paper No. 2012-24. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2127762

Contact Information

Robert H. Lande (Contact Author)
University of Baltimore - School of Law ( email )
1420 N. Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 21218
United States
Josh Paul Davis
University of San Francisco - School of Law ( email )
2130 Fulton Street
San Francisco, CA 94117
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 944
Downloads: 177
Download Rank: 97,562
Footnotes:  41
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.265 seconds