Joint ventures and the Supreme Court's decision in Texaco, Inc. V. Dagher: a win for substance over form

In the summer of 2004, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Dagher v. Saudi Refining, Inc., holding that the decision of a legitimate joint venture between two former competitors to charge a single price its products could constitute per se illegal price fixing under Sect...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Business Lawyer 2007-08, Vol.62 (4), p.1467
Main Author: Holden, James H
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alliances
Antitrust
Brands
Clayton Antitrust Act 1914-US
Commercial law
Competition
District courts
Federal court decisions
Joint ventures
Laws, regulations and rules
Marketing
Price fixing
Rule of reason
State court decisions
Substance over form
Supreme Court decisions
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In the summer of 2004, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Dagher v. Saudi Refining, Inc., holding that the decision of a legitimate joint venture between two former competitors to charge a single price its products could constitute per se illegal price fixing under Section I of the Sherman Act. This ruling generated significant antitrust uncertainty as to what joint ventures can and cannot do in operating their business. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Ninth Circuit, and in so doing helped to clarify this important but murky area of business law. This Article details the Court's Dagher decision, and the guidance that can be taken from it. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
ISSN:0007-6899
2164-1838