Evaluating Evidence in Antitrust Matters 10 quick rules
- Slides: 14
Evaluating Evidence in Antitrust Matters: 10 quick rules ICN Merger Working Group Workshop March 10 -11, 2009 Taipei
Planning n As part of your investigative plan, you need to determine: - types of evidence needed - likely sources - method of gathering evidence
Reliability of the evidence n Evidence should be tested n n Authentic documents Credibility of witnesses Have a basis for opinions given Keep a healthy skepticism
Three basic considerations Who said it – the source of the evidence n When and where they said it – the circumstances of the evidence n How do you interpret the evidence n
Who said it #1 Witnesses are most reliable when they have personal knowledge of the facts based on their own experience
Who said it #2 Parties and competitors: handle with care
Who said it #3 For opinions and the big picture, the higher in the company the better. For facts, the lower in the company the better
Who said it #4 Ask whether the witnesses are qualified to offer opinion evidence
When and where #5 Statements are more reliable when companies rely on their accuracy
When and where #6 Pre-existing documents are more reliable than present testimony
Interpreting the evidence #7 Actions speak louder than words
Interpreting the evidence #8 So do inactions: the dog that did not bark
Interpreting the evidence #9 Determine whether a witness’s experience is representative of others
Interpreting the evidence #10 Take the bitter and the sweet
Oil spill
Antitrust laws
Antitrust laws
Quick find algorithm
Collision forces quick check
Secondary sources
Primary evidence vs secondary evidence
Primary evidence vs secondary evidence
Primary evidence vs secondary evidence
Primary evidence vs secondary evidence
Is fiber class evidence
Class evidence vs individual evidence
Explain how class evidence can have probative value
Class and individual evidence
Example of fallacy
