The US District Court of Dallas dismisses antitrust claims because plaintiffs did not plausibly state an agreement on the market for direct online sale of hotel room reservations leaving the question of potential anticompetitive effect of the most favored nation (MFN) clause without an answer (OTC / Hotel Booking)

OTA Case Turns Out to Be Less about MFNs and More about Agreement* Back in September 2012, the potential anticompetitive aspects of most favored nation (MFN) clauses was the hot antitrust topic. While antitrust counselors (and courts) had found the clauses to be innocuous almost all the time, government officials made speeches and even held a workshop in front of an overflow crowd to discuss theories about when MFNs might actually be anticompetitive. Two live cases were thought to offer U.S. courts the opportunity to evaluate MFNs: the Justice Departmentā€™s e-books case against Apple, and the private class action against the major hotel chains and online travel agents (OTAs). Eighteen months later, however, the speeches seem to have ended, no report has come from the workshop, and at

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

Steven J. Cernak, The US District Court of Dallas dismisses antitrust claims because plaintiffs did not plausibly state an agreement on the market for direct online sale of hotel room reservations leaving the question of potential anticompetitive effect of the most favored nation (MFN) clause without an answer (OTC / Hotel Booking), 18 February 2014, e-Competitions Bulletin Platforms, Art. N° 64478

Visites 243

All issues

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