Handbook of the Law of Antitrust |
µµ¼ º»¹®¿¡¼
88°³ÀÇ °á°ú Áß 1 - 3°³
21 ÆäÀÌÁö
A more sophisticated rationale for a policy designed to foster competition has developed over the years since 1890 , a rationale which has become an important part of the antitrust tradition . Competition , it asserts , operates to keep ...
A more sophisticated rationale for a policy designed to foster competition has developed over the years since 1890 , a rationale which has become an important part of the antitrust tradition . Competition , it asserts , operates to keep ...
169 ÆäÀÌÁö
First , it distinguished between arrangements which " directly " and " immediately ¡± reduce competition , as would a rate agreement among competitors , and arrangements which had only indirect or incidental effects .
First , it distinguished between arrangements which " directly " and " immediately ¡± reduce competition , as would a rate agreement among competitors , and arrangements which had only indirect or incidental effects .
217 ÆäÀÌÁö
It also found that defendants could not compete effectively with the large chains without private label merchandise ... On this basis the trial court adopted the conclusionary finding that any restriction upon competition between the ...
It also found that defendants could not compete effectively with the large chains without private label merchandise ... On this basis the trial court adopted the conclusionary finding that any restriction upon competition between the ...
´Ù¸¥ »ç¶÷µéÀÇ ÀÇ°ß - ¼Æò ¾²±â
¼ÆòÀ» ãÀ» ¼ö ¾ø½À´Ï´Ù.
¸ñÂ÷
Chapter | 1 |
An Eclectic View of Antitrust and Legal Doctrine | 10 |
Basic Statutory Materials | 13 |
ÀúÀÛ±Ç | |
Ç¥½ÃµÇÁö ¾ÊÀº ¼½¼Ç 211°³
ÀÚÁÖ ³ª¿À´Â ´Ü¾î ¹× ±¸¹®
achieved action activity agreement analysis antitrust apply arrangement association basis boycott buyers cartel cert Commission competing competition competitors concentration concept conduct consider contract Corp corporation cost course Court customers deal dealer decision defendant demand denied discrimination economic effect efficiency entry established evidence example F.Supp fact firm given grant held holding increase industry integration interest involved issues joint Justice kind L.Ed less license limited manufacturer Materials matter ment merger monopoly particular patent performance person potential practice present price fixing problems profits protect question reason reduce require resale restraint restrictions result retail rule S.Ct Section sell seller share Sherman significant single social Standard structure substantial suggested supra tend territorial tion trade United unlawful vertical violation