The US Supreme Court overturns a lower court decision for the plaintiff but reiterates the traditional method of proving secondary line price injuries under the Robinson-Patman Act (Volvo Trucks / Reeder-Simco)

The Robinson-Patman Act and Consumer Welfare: Has Volvo Reconciled them?* The Robinson-Patman Act is the black sheep of antitrust. Unlike the other antitrust laws, its fundamental goal is not to preserve competition in order to benefit consumers, but to limit competitive rivalry in order to protect small business. The Act was passed principally to make it more difficult for large buyers to induce discriminatory prices or other concessions from sellers and use those advantages to take business or profits from smaller rivals. Such behavior, however, often benefits consumers, for large buyers frequently pass on their discriminatory advantages in the form of lower prices. In order to reduce the conflict between the Robinson-Patman Act and the other antitrust laws, the Supreme Court has

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

Quotation

John B. Kirkwood, The US Supreme Court overturns a lower court decision for the plaintiff but reiterates the traditional method of proving secondary line price injuries under the Robinson-Patman Act (Volvo Trucks / Reeder-Simco), 10 January 2006, e-Competitions Bulletin US Supreme Court, Art. N° 43810

Visites 402

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues