Antitrust Law Blog : Antitrust Lawyer & Attorney : Sheppard Mullin Law Firm : Antitrust Law Blog

I. Summary

On July 28, 2009, the European Commission (EC) launched a formal consultation on the EU rules applicable to distribution agreements. The current key legislation expires on May 31, 2010, and the intention appears to be to adopt the new rules before the end of this year. These proposals are important to both suppliers and retailers and affect both physical and online distribution. While the EC believes the current economic effects-based rules introduced in 1999 work well and do not need substantial change, it has published a revised draft Regulation and Guidelines that contain some important changes and clarifications from the existing law, in particular, with respect to internet sales, resale price maintenance, and purchasing power of large retailers.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Despite two 2007 Supreme Court decisions that make it more difficult to sue under federal antitrust laws for vertical price restraints, on July 15, 2009, a federal judge in Philadelphia granted class certification to a complaint alleging that Babies "R" Us ("BRU") coerced manufacturers of high-end baby products into preventing Internet dealers from discounting their products. McDonough et al. v. Toys "R" Us Inc. et al., No. 06-0242, 2009 WL 2055168 (E.D. Pa. July 15, 2009).
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Buyers of newly constructed homes in the Boise, Idaho, area filed a federal antitrust class action, alleging that realtors representing owners of undeveloped property tied the sale of the undeveloped lots to realtors’ services and commissions that included the new homes constructed on the lots by contractors, as well at the value of the lot. Plaintiffs claimed that the practice was a per se unlawful tying arrangement under Section 1 of The Sherman Act.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• "Zero Foreclosure" Is Less Than "De Minimus."
  ">Share Link

On August 10, 2009, a federal district court in Mississippi granted defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims alleging that defendants conspired to fix the prices of plywood in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Bailey Lumber & Supply Co. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. 1:08-CV-1394 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 10, 2009).
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link