The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit holds that parties to an arbitration agreement that prohibited joinder of jointly and severally liable defendants did not alter any substantive right under the Sherman or Clayton Acts (Cotton Yarn Antitrust Litigation)

In In re Cotton Yarn Antitrust Litigation, (505 F.3d 274 (4th Cir. 2007) the Fourth Circuit held inter alia that parties to an arbitration agreement that prohibited joinder of jointly and severally liable defendants did not alter any substantive right under the Sherman or Clayton Acts so as to deny the remedial and deterrent functions of the antitrust laws as defined in Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., which held antitrust disputes are properly arbitrable “so long as the prospective litigant effectively may vindicate its statutory cause of action in the arbitral forum.” (473 U.S. 614, 637 (1985)) Additionally, the Fourth Circuit held that because the Clayton Act’s four-year limitations period was merely a procedural provision, an agreement between the parties to

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

Kristen J. McAhren, The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit holds that parties to an arbitration agreement that prohibited joinder of jointly and severally liable defendants did not alter any substantive right under the Sherman or Clayton Acts (Cotton Yarn Antitrust Litigation), 12 October 2007, e-Competitions Bulletin October 2007, Art. N° 37106

Visites 289

All issues

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