Showing 1 - 10 of 11
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010325452
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011343268
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003761353
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10002851571
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10001780952
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of damages suffered from a breach of federal antitrust law to direct purchasers only. Even though typically antitrust injury is, at least in part, passed on to firms lower in...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014064647
One of the lessons of US private antitrust enforcement is that limitations on the rights of the defendant and the plaintiffs' standing to sue should not be imposed lightly. Three Supreme Court decisions in Hanover Shoe, Illinois Brick and ARC America have resulted in a complex and unwieldy...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014058187
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003401481
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10001720556
Competition policy is a subject of heated debate. Antitrust authorities, seeking to battle anticompetitive behavior in complex cases to the best of their abilities, often find themselves advised by rival economic theories and disputed empirical analyses. As a consequence, there is a real...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014094885