Third Circuit doubts Uber’s entry was anticompetitive
An appellate panel at oral arguments on Tuesday expressed doubt that Uber’s entry into Philadelphia’s for-hire transportation market was an illegal attempted monopoly, as the judges questioned how the company’s entry can be characterised as anything but procompetitive.
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