Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2010 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Noman, Gustavo Lage
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Campilongo, Celso Fernandes |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Direito
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/8966
|
Resumo: |
Evidences are very important for the antitrust procedure, as well as in any and all types of procedures. However, for a long time the discussion of evidences was set aside by the Brazilian antitrust community. Due to the increase in the activities of the Brazilian antitrust authorities, in both the merger control revision and the investigation of anticompetitive behaviors, there is an increase in the discussion regarding evidences. For example, which is the standard of proof necessary for a decision of any concrete case? What type of evidences is necessary for a decision in an antitrust procedure? What type of evidences can be used by the authorities? Which is the role of the economic evidences in the antitrust procedure? How to produce such economic evidences? Which are the limits for the use by the antitrust authorities of the borrowed evidences? Which are the limits that the antitrust authorities face for the evidences collected, in special regarding the new mechanisms available (leniency agreements, dawn raids and inspections)? The purpose of the present essay is to analyze these questions, seeking in CADE s case law, in commentators and in the foreign experience, the best approach to deal with the evidences in antitrust cases |
