The Influence of So-called Private Actions for Damages on the Nature and Function of Liability

The article tackles the question of social functions of damages in connection with private enforcement of damages caused by infringement of antitrust law. Restitution (reparation) is considered to be the main function, whereas prevention or (re)distribution is rather a technical means of achieving reparation. Green Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC Treaty antitrust rules from 2005 and a White book on the same topic from 2008 are commented from the point of view of meeting the demands of restitution (compensation) and deterrence (prevention).
Some negative aspects and threats of private enforcement are introduced, such as its possible misuse to assertion of private interests of enforcing attorneys, misuse as an extortion in a competitive struggle, possible weakening of public law enforcement. Multiple damages are to be denied in Europe as foreign both to European legal culture and tradition and to the relevant regulation.
The main sense of damages is not the punishment but instead, compensation of damage suffered. Private enforcement of damages distinctively fosters compensatory function that is either suppressed and neglected (if not totally excluded) in the public law enforcement. Lowering the possibility that antitrust enfringement will pay off is supported by the private law enforcement. Preventive function of legal responsibility is enhanced in this way both in its individual and its general meanings.