SCOTUS split on burden-shifting and antitrust harm, lawyers say
Justices hearing oral arguments in the Ohio v American Express case before the Supreme Court showed a lack of agreement on both the basics of the three-step rule-of-reason analysis and what would indicate harm to competition, observers have said.
Subscribe to Global Competition Review
Subscribe to unlock unlimited access
Get news, unique commentary, expert analysis and essential resources from the Global Competition Review experts.
Already have access? Login below
Copyright © Law Business ResearchCompany Number: 03281866 VAT: GB 160 7529 10