NOV-11(1)

In this issue:

We have two indisputable facts in this issue: The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act is, to be kind, muddled. And modern court decisions on federal pleading standards haven’t exactly been uniform. So what happens when the two collide, as in the recent Potash decision? Our authors have brilliantly highlighted the issues; but, as might be expected, have reached quite different conclusions. Plus there’s a bonus—given the complexity, we’ve added a resource providing reprints and downloadable copies of the key cases and legislation. And since we’re discussing extraterritorial matters, we’ve added a special interest article on a novel approach to untangling the thorny issue of how the EU should compensate cartel victims—without involving U.S. law.

 

Potash & the FTAIA

Alicia Batts, Keith Butler, Nov 16, 2011

Recovery in the U.S. for Price Fixing Abroad: The Future of FTAIA Litigation

Defendants may find it more difficult to win early dismissal, and avoid expensive discovery, in antitrust cases involving foreign conduct affecting U.S. commerce. Alicia Batts & Keith Butler (Proskauer)

Max Huffman, Nov 16, 2011

New Lessons for Pleading the FTAIA

Minn-Chem v. Agrium is the latest in a long line of opinions reflecting courts suspicions of private plaintiff efforts to expand the scope of private antitrust enforcement. Max Huffman (Indiana Univ.)

Erika Douglas, Mark Katz, Nov 16, 2011

Minn-Chem Incorporated et al. v.

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!