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 and start reading now
Already have access? Login below
Copyright © Law Business ResearchCompany Number: 03281866 VAT: GB 160 7529 10