AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Edited Legal Collections Data

You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Edited Legal Collections Data >> 2012 >> [2012] ELECD 859

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Gilbert, Pamela; Romanenko, Victoria --- "Proposals for Reform" [2012] ELECD 859; in Foer, A. Albert; Stutz, M. Randy (eds), "Private Enforcement of Antitrust Law in the United States" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2012)

Book Title: Private Enforcement of Antitrust Law in the United States

Editor(s): Foer, A. Albert; Stutz, M. Randy

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9780857939593

Section: Chapter 15

Section Title: Proposals for Reform

Author(s): Gilbert, Pamela; Romanenko, Victoria

Number of pages: 22

Extract:

15 Proposals for reform
Pamela Gilbert1 and Victoria Romanenko2


§ 15.01 Introduction
§ 15.02 Twombly and Iqbal: Federal pleading standards
§ 15.03 Class action waivers
§ 15.04 Indirect purchaser litigation
§ 15.05 Claims reduction and contribution
§ 15.06 Reverse payments
§ 15.07 Minimum resale price maintenance
§ 15.08 The Robinson-Patman Act
§ 15.09 The Railroad Antitrust Enforcement Act
§ 15.10 The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act
§ 15.11 Conclusion

§ 15.01 Introduction

The private enforcement scheme of the U.S. antitrust laws has stood the test of time for
almost a century. That scheme, as established by § 4 of the Clayton Act in 1914, provides
for treble damages and costs, including attorneys' fees, for any person "injured in his busi-
ness or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws."3
The Supreme Court has repeatedly found that private actions play a critical role in the
enforcement of the antitrust laws and the protection of a fair marketplace. It explained in
Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. that "[t]he treble-damages pro-
vision wielded by the private litigant is a chief tool in the antitrust enforcement scheme,
posing a crucial deterrent to potential violators."4
Over time, some Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of the private right
of action and others have expanded it. Congress has also stepped in with legislation that
has affected the rules governing private enforcement of the antitrust laws. But throughout
the many decades of litigation ...


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ELECD/2012/859.html