CASE COMMENTS : FOREIGN CASE LAW - PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT – MONOPOLIZATION – PREDATORY PRICING – RECOUPMENT - ALL BUSINESS SECTORS

Private enforcement - predatory pricing : The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejects predatory pricing allegations due to lack of evidence (Affinity / GfK Mediamark Research and Intelligence)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Predatory pricing is a common issue in U.S. antitrust litigation, but convictions on this basis are rarely upheld, as federal case law imposes a strict evidentiary framework on these issues. A December 5, 2013 decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit illustrates this state of affairs (Affinity LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GFK Mediamark Research and Intelligence LLC, Defendant-Appellant. No. 13-1536-cv., Dec. 5, 2013). Rigorously classic, the commented decision recalls the importance for the plaintiffs to present solid and provided files in order to hope to win their case in the litigation of section 2 of the Sherman Act. In the present

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

Jean-Christophe Roda, Private enforcement - predatory pricing : The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejects predatory pricing allegations due to lack of evidence (Affinity / GfK Mediamark Research and Intelligence), 5 December 2013, Concurrences N° 1-2014, Art. N° 63517, pp. 234-235

Visites 245

All reviews