PUBLISHED ON: June 13, 2006
This paper will examine the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in F. Hoffman-LaRoche Ltd. v. Empagran SA,1 which based its decision on the application of the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 2 (the FTAIA) to “vitamin sellers around the world that agreed to fix prices, leading to higher vitamin prices in the United States and independently leading to higher vitamin prices in other countries such as Ecuador.” Id. at 159.
The origin of the Court’s extension of the reach of U.S. antitrust laws will be examined in light of the following precedent: American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 US 347 (1909); United States v. Aluminum, Co. of America, 148 F2d 416 (2d Cir. 1945); Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio, 475 US 572 (1986); Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, 509 US 764 (1993); U.S. v. Nippon Paper Indus. Co. Ltd., 109 F3d 1 (1st Cir. 1997); Den Norske Stats Oljeselskap As v. HeereMac Vof, 241 F3d 420 (5th Cir. 2001); and Kruman v. Christie’s Int’l PLC, 284 F3d 384 (2d Cir. 2002).
To read the full article, please click here.