Antitrust gets personal this month discussing individual liability, credentials, criminality, and health. Plus we take a look at some important case decisions and non-decisions. But don’t miss the recount of Justice Sotomayor’s reenactment of the infamous Curt Flood case – who says the Justices don’t have a sense of humor?
It’s funny to observe that the cult of personality/firms prevalent in the EU competition world is, to a great extent, grounded on practically no available information.
What we were arguing for is (a ruling) consistent with a broader line of precedent requiring plaintiffs to prove below-cost pricing when the mechanism of exclusion is a discount.
On its face, this defence allows cartelists to escape a criminal conviction where they have contacted their lawyers and informed them of their future plans to cartelise.
It can be argued that they do – in combination – represent a shift in the balance of competition policy in the direction of limiting the ability of licensors to exploit invalid IP rights or to prevent such rights from being challenged in the Courts.
While the U.S. Department of Justice’s new policy on not naming individuals in corporate plea agreements in antitrust matters has won praise from the defense bar, some lawyers say it remains unclear how the shift will play out in practice.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
