Antitrust

Throwback Thursday: Empagran’s Complicated Legacy

Twenty years ago tomorrow, on June 14, 2004, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Stephen Breyer, interpreted the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA) to preclude the application of U.S. antitrust law to injuries in other countries. Empagran…

Continue Reading

District Court Rejects Forum Non Conveniens Motion in Haiti Price-Fixing Case

The plaintiffs in Celestin v. Martelly brought a class action alleging that Haitian President Michel Joseph Martelly hatched a scheme to impose fees and fix prices on money transfers, food remittances, and international calls to and from Haiti and that Haitian and U.S. companies joined the scheme in violation of U.S. antitrust law, the federal…

Continue Reading

The New (Old) Presumption Against Extraterritoriality

The reach of U.S. law keeps changing. For decades—in fact, off and on for more than a century—U.S. courts have turned to the presumption against extraterritoriality to determine the geographic scope of federal statutes. When the presumption changes, so does the reach of U.S. law. And the presumption has changed a lot lately. Most recently,…

Continue Reading

A Primer on Foreign State Compulsion

Foreign state compulsion (also called foreign sovereign compulsion) is a doctrine allowing a U.S. court to excuse violations of U.S. law or moderate the sanctions imposed for such violations on the ground that they are compelled by foreign law. The doctrine arises most often when foreign law blocks compliance with U.S. discovery requests and in…

Continue Reading

Using TLB to Teach International Business Transactions

This post continues our series explaining how professors can use resources on TLB to teach various classes. This post discusses International Business Transactions (IBT). Although TLB focuses on litigation and IBT focuses on transactions, there is a great deal of overlap. The most obvious examples are contractual clauses that plan for dispute resolution, like forum…

Continue Reading

Throwback Thursday: Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America

Although the relevant text of the Sherman Act remained unchanged for most of the twentieth century, courts’ interpretations of its extraterritorial reach fluctuated dramatically. In 1909, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a territorial approach in American Banana, described in a recent post, holding that the Sherman Act applied only to anticompetitive conduct in the United…

Continue Reading

Comparing Extraterritoriality in the EU

How a court decides whether a statute applies extraterritorially is a fundamental question in transnational litigation. TLB has lots of information about the U.S. approach. Our Primer on Extraterritoriality describes the federal and state approaches, as well as the customary international law rules on jurisdiction to prescribe. Recent posts have discussed the extraterritorial application of…

Continue Reading

Throwback Thursday: American Banana and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality

Today, it is “well established” that U.S. antitrust law applies extraterritorially to foreign conduct that causes substantial effects in the United States, but this was not always true. When the Supreme Court first addressed the geographic scope of the Sherman Act in 1909, it held that the act applied only to conduct in the United…

Continue Reading

Throwback Thursday: International Association of Machinists v. OPEC

In 1978, the International Association of Machinists (IAM), a labor union, sued OPEC and its member countries for violating U.S. antitrust law by operating a cartel. The district court held that OPEC countries were immune from suit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). On appeal the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal on…

Continue Reading

Second Circuit Rejects Act of State Doctrine in Antitrust Case

In a recent decision, Celestin v. Caribbean Air Mail, Inc., the Second Circuit held that the act of state doctrine does not bar U.S. antitrust claims based on the acts of a foreign government. Although the Second Circuit is right, its decision diverges from the decisions of other circuits that have applied the doctrine as…

Continue Reading