File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: The Standard of Proof in Civil Competition Law Proceedings

TitleThe Standard of Proof in Civil Competition Law Proceedings
Authors
Issue Date2016
PublisherSweet & Maxwell Ltd.
Citation
The Law Quarterly Review, 2016, v. 132 n. 4, p. 541-546 How to Cite?
AbstractDiscusses the relevant Hong Kong decisions (of the Court of First Instance recently in Television Broadcasts Ltd v Communications Authority [2016] 2 HKLRD 41; of the Court of Final Appeal in Koon Wing Yee v Insider Dealing Tribunal (2008) 11 HKCFAR 170) and UK decisions (of the Competition Appeal Tribunal in Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading [2002] CAT 1; JJB Sports plc v Office of Fair Trading [2004] CAT 17; of the House of Lords in Re H (Minors) [1996] AC 563; Re D [2008] 1 WLR 1499; Re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2009] 1 AC 11) on the issue of the appropriate standard of proof in civil competition law proceedings. Argues that the application of the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities in civil competition law proceedings classified as “criminal” for human rights purposes can be supported by two relevant factors: (i) the workability of the standards in light of the technical nature of the evidence involved; and (ii) the severity of the potential penalty.
DescriptionNotes
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/236413
ISSN
SSRN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKwok, KHF-
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-25T00:53:02Z-
dc.date.available2016-11-25T00:53:02Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationThe Law Quarterly Review, 2016, v. 132 n. 4, p. 541-546-
dc.identifier.issn0023-933X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/236413-
dc.descriptionNotes-
dc.description.abstractDiscusses the relevant Hong Kong decisions (of the Court of First Instance recently in Television Broadcasts Ltd v Communications Authority [2016] 2 HKLRD 41; of the Court of Final Appeal in Koon Wing Yee v Insider Dealing Tribunal (2008) 11 HKCFAR 170) and UK decisions (of the Competition Appeal Tribunal in Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading [2002] CAT 1; JJB Sports plc v Office of Fair Trading [2004] CAT 17; of the House of Lords in Re H (Minors) [1996] AC 563; Re D [2008] 1 WLR 1499; Re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2009] 1 AC 11) on the issue of the appropriate standard of proof in civil competition law proceedings. Argues that the application of the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities in civil competition law proceedings classified as “criminal” for human rights purposes can be supported by two relevant factors: (i) the workability of the standards in light of the technical nature of the evidence involved; and (ii) the severity of the potential penalty.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSweet & Maxwell Ltd. -
dc.relation.ispartofThe Law Quarterly Review-
dc.titleThe Standard of Proof in Civil Competition Law Proceedings-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailKwok, KHF: khfkwok@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityKwok, KHF=rp01637-
dc.identifier.hkuros270504-
dc.identifier.volume132-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage541-
dc.identifier.epage546-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-
dc.identifier.ssrn2849761-
dc.identifier.issnl0023-933X-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats