The Supreme Court shows a growing determination in its antitrust decisions to convert laws designed to promote competition into laws which regulate or hamper the competitive process. Succeeding interpretations of the Clayton and Robinson-Patman Acts–and, by infectious contamination, the Sherman Act–demonstrate an increasingly apparent disregard for the central purpose of antitrust, the promotion of consumer welfare through the promotion of a competitive market process. Now, in Utah Pie Co. v. Continental Baking Co., the Supreme Court has used section 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act to strike directly at price competition itself
One of the primary purposes-some would say the primary pur- pose--of antitrust laws is to promote e...
During the last twenty years, there has been a revolution in antitrust law. As a result of extensive...
Passage of the Sherman Act in the United States in 1890 set the stage for a century of jurisprudence...
Includes bibliographical references (p. ).For more than one hundred years, American antitrust laws h...
Two recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court serve to focus attention on the legal limits...
A critical safeguard of the competitive process, Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits un...
In the course of damning the market giant Standard Oil, the Supreme Court declared that the purpose ...
Through the years, the Supreme Court has emphasized numerous times that [t]he heart of our national...
Today, some antitrust commentators have called for the Supreme Court to abandon its focus on protect...
Substantive antitrust law has dramatically shrunk. The shrinkage, which began in the 1970s with the ...
The Supreme Court of the United States reversed a prior holding and ruled that nonprice restrictions...
The United States Supreme Court, distinguishing between sales and agency transactions, has held that...
The United States Supreme Court has held that the inference of a reasonable possibility of competiti...
The Supreme Court has created various tests in cases involving antitrust preemption of state regulat...
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act declares every contract in restraint of trade to be illegal. The early de...
One of the primary purposes-some would say the primary pur- pose--of antitrust laws is to promote e...
During the last twenty years, there has been a revolution in antitrust law. As a result of extensive...
Passage of the Sherman Act in the United States in 1890 set the stage for a century of jurisprudence...
Includes bibliographical references (p. ).For more than one hundred years, American antitrust laws h...
Two recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court serve to focus attention on the legal limits...
A critical safeguard of the competitive process, Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits un...
In the course of damning the market giant Standard Oil, the Supreme Court declared that the purpose ...
Through the years, the Supreme Court has emphasized numerous times that [t]he heart of our national...
Today, some antitrust commentators have called for the Supreme Court to abandon its focus on protect...
Substantive antitrust law has dramatically shrunk. The shrinkage, which began in the 1970s with the ...
The Supreme Court of the United States reversed a prior holding and ruled that nonprice restrictions...
The United States Supreme Court, distinguishing between sales and agency transactions, has held that...
The United States Supreme Court has held that the inference of a reasonable possibility of competiti...
The Supreme Court has created various tests in cases involving antitrust preemption of state regulat...
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act declares every contract in restraint of trade to be illegal. The early de...
One of the primary purposes-some would say the primary pur- pose--of antitrust laws is to promote e...
During the last twenty years, there has been a revolution in antitrust law. As a result of extensive...
Passage of the Sherman Act in the United States in 1890 set the stage for a century of jurisprudence...