– having regard to its resolutions of 25 April 2007 on the Green Paper on Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules and of 26 March 2009 on the White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules and to the opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of 20 October 2011 on ‘Towards a Coherent Approach on Collective Redress’,

15. Recalls its resolution of 25 April 2007 on the Green Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules and stresses that the pending legislative proposal in relation thereto should include the content of Parliament's resolution of 26 March 2009 on the White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules ; stresses the need for the Commission to propose legislation, without watering it down unnecessarily, to facilitate individual and class-action claims for effective compensation for damages resulting from breaches of EU antitrust law; such legalisation must be cross-cutting in nature, avoid the excesses o ...[+++]f the North American system and be adopted using the ordinary legislative procedure (codecision);

– (RO) The Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection has formulated its position based on a certain reality: the negative effects resulting from the breach of antitrust legislation can be felt economically very often at the end of the commercial chain, affecting end consumers and small enterprises.

7. Considers that one of the tools for safeguarding freedom of expression and information is the enforcement of the rules on free competition (prohibition of restricted practices and abuse of dominant positions). However, efficient companies are run with the aim of winning markets and must be able to secure positions of genuine market strength. Holding a dominant position is not in itself illegal if its results from the efficient r ...[+++]unning of a company. Only if a company uses its power to prevent competition does this constitute an abuse of a dominant position where action should be taken by the competent anti-trust authorities;

Other areas that fall under the act are reviewable matters including mergers, abusive dominant position, refusal to deal, consignment selling, tied selling, market restriction and pricing.

The non-criminal or civil matters by contrast may be reviewed by the Competition Tribunal of Canada. These include mergers, abuse of dominant position, refusal to deal, consignment selling, monopoly tied selling, market restriction and delivered pricing.