Competition Litigation Lawyers Worldwide.

These lawyers handle high-stakes disputes where market fairness is the central issue, primarily Cartel Damages (suing price-fixers), Abuse of Dominance (suing a monopoly for bullying competitors), and Class Actions. They essentially act as private enforcers of antitrust laws; while government regulators (like the DOJ or CMA) fine companies for breaking the law, competition litigators sue those companies to get money back for the businesses and consumers who were ripped off.

Yes, and you don’t even need to be their direct customer to do it. If a supplier fixed prices (e.g., for LCD screens or truck parts), anyone who bought a product containing that part can potentially sue for the “overcharge”—the extra money you paid because the price was artificially inflated. In the US, successful plaintiffs are entitled to “Treble Damages” (three times the actual loss), which is a unique punitive measure designed to encourage victims to come forward.

Competition class actions aggregate millions of small claims into one massive lawsuit. In the US, these are “Opt-Out” by default (everyone is included unless they leave). In the UK, the regime has recently shifted to allow US-style “Opt-Out” claims in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT); this has led to a surge in mega-cases, such as the £14 billion claim against Mastercard on behalf of 46 million British consumers, which would have been impossible under the old rules.

This is the defendant’s favorite shield. If you sue a supplier for overcharging you by 10%, they will argue that you didn’t actually lose any money because you “passed on” that extra cost to your own customers by raising your prices. If the court accepts this defense, your damages are reduced to zero because you technically suffered no financial loss. However, proving exactly how much cost was passed on requires complex economic evidence that lawyers fight over for years.

Yes, and you need one immediately because leniency is a “winner-takes-all” race. The first company to report the cartel to regulators (like the CMA or DOJ) usually gets 100% immunity from fines and jail time, while the second company might only get a 50% reduction. A lawyer manages this by securing a “marker”—a placeholder that reserves your spot at the front of the line while they gather the internal evidence needed to perfect your confession.

Damages are calculated by finding the difference between the “actual price” you paid and the “but-for price”—the theoretical price you would have paid if the cartel hadn’t existed. Economists use regression analysis to estimate this “but-for” price, typically finding that cartels inflate prices by an average of 20%. You are then owed that 20% overcharge multiplied by the total volume of goods you bought during the entire conspiracy period.

Yes, a defense lawyer’s primary strategy is to prove that your aggressive conduct was “Objectively Justified.” For example, if you refused to supply a competitor, your lawyer might argue it wasn’t to destroy them, but because they had poor credit history (a valid commercial reason). Alternatively, they will argue “efficiencies”—that your actions, while tough on competitors, actually lowered prices or improved innovation for consumers, which is the ultimate goal of competition law.

A “follow-on” claim is the easiest type of lawsuit to win because the hard work is already done. It occurs after a regulator (like the European Commission or CMA) has already investigated and issued a formal decision proving the company broke the law. In these cases, you don’t need to prove liability (guilt); the court accepts the regulator’s decision as fact, so the trial focuses strictly on calculating how much money the defendant owes you.