February 2007 Vol. 105 No. 4 THE REVIEW

Keeping the Door Ajar for Foreign Plaintiffs in Global Cartel Cases after Empagran

Jeremy M. Suhr

In many ways, the Supreme Court’s opinion in F. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. raised more questions than it answered. Growing out of the massive international vitamins cartel uncovered in the 1990s, Empagran presented a scenario in which all parties were foreign and all conduct occurred abroad. Although it is “well established by now that the Sherman Act applies to foreign conduct that was meant to produce and did in fact produce some substantial effect in the United States,” Empagran presented the Court with the first truly foreign antitrust case. It involved not only foreign conduct, but also foreign plaintiffs complaining of injuries suffered abroad at the hands of foreign defendants. The case therefore appeared to present thorny questions about the proper construction of the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (“FTAIA”) and the extent of the Sherman Act’s extraterritorial application.

   //  VIEW PDF
& Other Current Events

How the Gun-Free School Zones Act Saved the Individual Mandate

  For all the drama surrounding the Commerce Clause challenge to the individual mandate provision...

Citing Orin Kerr from MLR Volume 102, the Court addresses the controversy over GPS trackers and the Fourth Amendment

The Supreme Court's opinion in United States v. Jones, on GPS trackers and the Fourth Amendment, cited...

Inside Agency Preemption

A subtle shift has taken place in the mechanics of preemption, the doctrine that determines when federal...

Criminal Sanctions in the Defense of the Innocent

  Under the formal rules of criminal procedure, fact finders are required to apply a uniform standard...

On Strict Liability Crimes: Preserving a Moral Framework for Criminal Intent in an Intent-Free Moral World

The law has long recognized a presumption against criminal strict liability. This Note situates that...
MAILING LIST
Sign Up to Join Our Mailing List