Tyres, Umbrella Claims and Limitation Periods

Published On 07/10/2014 | By Peta Stevenson | Litigation

In September, our London colleagues Sarah Turnbull and Elaine Whiteford contributed a chapter to the 7th edition of The International Comparative Legal guide to: Competition Litigation 2015.

Their chapter discusses a number of significant developments and clarifications over the past year in relation to private damages actions and notes that during the last twelve months there has been a series of “could have beens” and “might have beens” in the world of private damages actions.

Prior to the summer of 2014, all eyes were on two cases pending before the English courts – Cooper Tire and National Grid – which had been on foot since 2007 and 2008 respectively. Having taken years to work their way through the English courts, grappling along the way with issues around jurisdiction, Masterfoods stays and Pfleiderer disclosure, these two cases were finally due to be heard at full trial in the summer of 2014.

Read their chapter in full.

This article appeared in the 2015 edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Competition Litigation; published by Global Legal Group Ltd, London.

Photo credit: https://flic.kr/p/4Lyws7 (converted to B&W and cropped)

Like this post? Share it... Email this to someonePrint this pageShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+

About The Author

is a partner in the Sydney office of King & Wood Mallesons where she specialises in competition litigation with experience in a wide range of jurisdictions. Peta also advises clients on the application of the anti-competitive conduct, consumer protection and access provisions of the Competition & Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and related state legislation. In 2001/02 she undertook her LLM at the University of Cambridge, during which time she developed a passionate if fleeting interest in rowing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

20 + 11 =