Tag Archives: ANTITRUST AND TRADE REGULATION

PRICE-SQUEEZE CLAIMS ARE NO LONGER COGNIZABLE PURSUANT TO § 2 OF THE SHERMAN ACT ABSENT AN ANTITRUST DUTY TO DEAL AT THE WHOLESALE LEVEL OR PREDATORY PRICING AT THE RETAIL LEVEL: PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO. V. LINKLINE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

BY CHRISTIAN EVANS

Since 1945, courts have struggled to develop a precise formula in which price-squeeze claims can be settled under antitrust law. This struggle has resulted in a variety of inconsistent rulings throughout the court of appeals. In 2009, the Supreme Court attempted to remedy this dilemma by separating the price-squeeze into its core components of an antitrust duty to deal at the wholesale level, and predatory pricing at the retail level. This decision has dramatically changed the course of antitrust law by redefining the manner in which courts deal with the price-squeeze claim.
Continue Reading>

206 Comments

Filed under Volume 12-2