Class Action Lawsuits in Competition Cases in the US and UK and Prospects for their Development in Russia

The need to protect the rights and legitimate interests of entities affected by anti-competitive actions, to compensate for the losses caused to them, as well as to suppress illegal behavior in relation to a wide range of people, requires states to search for various measures to counteract such abuse by companies of their market power. One possible measure is class action, which is currently used in the US and UK as an effective mechanism to protect businesses and consumers from anti-competitive behavior. Taking into account the fact that the procedure of group proceedings has been developed in modern Russian legislation, the experience of implementing the relevant norms in other countries is of undoubted interest for study. The author analyzes the provisions on class actions contained in the legislation of the United States and Great Britain, the practice of their application in the field of competition protection, as well as the prospects for class proceedings in Russia. The conclusion is made about the insufficiency of legally fixed economic incentives for filing class actions, which may prevent the widespread use of this institution in Russian practice, including in antimonopoly disputes.

1. Abolonin G. O. Gruppovye iski. — M.: Norma, 2001. — 256 s.

2. Bashlakov-Nikolaev I. V. Grazhdansko-pravovaya otvetstvennost v sfere zashchity konkurentsii. Sistema chastnykh i gruppovykh iskov // Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika. — 2013. — № 7. — S. 75–82.

3. Butakova Ya. S. Osobennosti angliyskogo grazhdanskogo protsessa // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. — 2021. № 1. — S. 54–69.

4. Vyalykh E. I. Gruppovoy isk v arbitrazhnom sudoproizvodstve Rossii: problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya i puti ikh resheniya // Pravovaya nauka i reforma yuridicheskogo obrazovaniya. — 2012. — № 2. — S. 54–61.

5. Gruppovye iski v tsivilisticheskom protsesse Rossii / V. Yarkov, E. Kudryavtseva, D. Maleshin [i dr.] // Zakon. 2019. — № 8. — S. 24–43.

6. Eliseev N. G. Grazhdanskoe protsessualnoe pravo zarubezhnykh stran: uchebnik. — 2-e izd., pererab. i dop. — M.: Prospekt, TK Velbi, 2004. — 602 s.

7. Zvier P., Yarkov V. V. Gruppovye iski v pravovoy istorii SShA i Rossii: v poiskakh optimalnoy modeli // Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. — 2020. — № 1. — S. 143–197.

8. Istomin V. G. Antikonkurentnye soglasheniya: yuridicheskaya sushchnost i pravovye posledstviya // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. — 2018. — № 12. — S. 62–71.

9. Kurbatova S. N. Kritika kontseptsii «edinogo pravootnosheniya» pri rassmotrenii gruppovykh iskov v arbitrazhnom protsesse RF // Otechestvennaya yurisprudentsiya. — 2016. — № 12. — S. 71–74.

10. Lobanov R. M. Shag vpered, dva shaga nazad v voprosakh zashchity gruppy lits v rossiyskom prave // Yurist. 2019. — № 6. — S. 59–62.

11. Molchanov A. V., Lobanov R. M. Vozmeshchenie ubytkov, prichinennykh narusheniem antimonopolnogo zakonodatelstva // Zhurnal predprinimatelskogo i korporativnogo prava. — 2018. — № 4. — S. 42–47.

12. Reshetnikova I. V. Razmyshlyaya o sudoproizvodstve: izbrannoe. — M.: Statut, 2019. — 510 s.

13. Starikov A. V. Grazhdansko-pravovye sposoby zashchity ot narusheniy antimonopolnogo zakonodatelstva // Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. — 2020. — № 6. — S. 48–78.

14. Shramm Kh. Y. Yuridicheskiy analiz dizelnogo skandala v Germanii i SShA — pouchitelnaya pesa na temu zashchity prav potrebiteley // Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. — 2018. № 11. — S. 159–175.

15. Maggs P. B. Unconscionability of the Arbitration Clause under United States Law // Vestnik mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazha. — 2010. — № 1. — S. 167–181.