Frontier Publications
- Google itFirm strategy in communication device, platform and application integrationBulletin | 18.11.2011.
- Thinking outside the box: calculating damagesReflections on major cartel cases in AustraliaBulletin | 27.04.2011.
- Where convergence exposes divergenceImplications of convergence on broadcast licensingBulletin | 06.04.2011.
- Green is GoodClimate Institute study on clean energy jobsBulletin | 03.03.2011.
- Blurring the distinction between carbon costs and pricesBulletin | 08.12.2010.
- What’s the cost of carbon uncertainty?The impact of delayed investment in the power sectorBulletin | 08.11.2010.
- Third time luckyMobile termination regulation in New ZealandBulletin | 17.09.2010.
- Keep 'em un-coordinatedCoordinated effects in mergersBulletin | 19.08.2010.
- The times, they’re a changin’Using economics to adapt to climate changeBulletin | 11.08.2010.
- Economic Analysis of the RSPTWith a postscript on the negotiated outcomePaper | 05.07.2010.
What if, but for?
Enron versus EWSThe first follow-on claim for damages to reach trial in the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) was triggered by a finding of unlawful discrimination between customers by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). The claim was unsuccessful; and the case offered important insights into the standard of evidence required of claimants. In particular, it illuminated the way a court will consider arguments about how parties might have behaved in a “but for” world - one in which competition law infringement had not taken place. Frontier’s Zoltan Biro provided expert economic evidence for the defendants.
 Frontier bulletin - What if, but for.pdf |
 Printer friendly
|
