The California Supreme Court rejects "Pass-On" Defense for antitrust damages (Pfizer)

In its July 12, 2010, decision in Clayworth v. Pfizer, Inc., the California Supreme Court rejected the « pass-on » defense for claims brought under California's antitrust law, the Cartwright Act. Defendants have used the pass-on defense to argue that direct purchasers of goods sold by allegedly price fixing manufacturers were not injured because the purchasers « passed on » the overcharge to their own customers. Rejecting this defense, the California Supreme Court now has authorized purchasers at multiple levels of the distribution chain to recover for price fixing, even where the alleged overcharge was passed on from purchaser to purchaser. I. The Clayworth case Clayworth and other retail pharmacies brought an antitrust action under

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

Authors

  • Jones Day (Los Angeles)
  • Jones Day (Los Angeles)

Quotation

Jeffrey A. LeVee, Eric P. Enson, The California Supreme Court rejects "Pass-On" Defense for antitrust damages (Pfizer), 12 July 2010, e-Competitions Bulletin July 2010, Art. N° 33666

Visites 965

All issues

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