Antitrust practices are pending issues on a global level. Investigating and sanctioning such practices have been a primary interest worldwide. Such unlawful activities harm and jeopardize not only the companies, which participate in it, but also the consumers suffering the results of the conspiracy. Each jurisdiction has adopted its own approach to investigate and impose penalties on the infringers and to, therefore, abolish the cartel practices. However, even though the aim and the result of each is to achieve cartel deterrence, the differences which exist is in the approaches applied by the different jurisdictions. This gives rise to the question, as to whether one provides for better outcomes in comparison to the other.
The jurisdictions analyzed throughout this paper are the European Union and the United States of America. The relevant legislation, case law and literature are compared and discussed for the purpose of outlining the differences and commonalities in both approaches undertaken. The paper provides an answer to the question whether the criminal sanctioning element presented in the US method proves more workable than the administrative and fine-focused system of the EU. Suggestions for smooth merging and innovative approaches towards the issue are provided for the purpose of meeting the challenges of globalization.