Have been

[Allen165]

"In this case, the potential addressees of any Decision on the anti-competitive behaviour of the airlines would have been the airlines themselves, and not Lord Bethell (who would also have been unlikely to have been able to prove that any such Decision would have directly and individually concerned him)." (Source: Elspeth Berry and Sylvia Hargreaves, European Union Law, 2nd edition, p. 115.)

The second "have been" seems redundant to me. Wouldn't it suffice to write "who would also have been unlikely to be able to prove"?

Thanks!

[5jj]

"In this case, the potential addressees of any Decision on the anti-competitive behaviour of the airlines would have been the airlines themselves, and not Lord Bethell (who would also have been unlikely to have been able to prove that any such Decision would have directly and individually concerned him)." (Source: Elspeth Berry and Sylvia Hargreaves, European Union Law, 2nd edition, p. 115.)

The second "have been" seems redundant to me. Wouldn't it suffice to write "who would also have been unlikely to be able to prove"?

Yes.

The writer has got carried away.

[billmcd]

"In this case, the potential addressees of any Decision on the anti-competitive behaviour of the airlines would have been the airlines themselves, and not Lord Bethell (who would also have been unlikely to have been able to prove that any such Decision would have directly and individually concerned him)." (Source: Elspeth Berry and Sylvia Hargreaves, European Union Law, 2nd edition, p. 115.)

The second "have been" seems redundant to me. Wouldn't it suffice to write "who would also have been unlikely to be able to prove"?

Thanks!

Agree. And in your alternative I would go a step further and delete "to be" as in, "who would also have been unlikely able to prove....."