Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:28:50.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Discussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Vicki E. Baer
Vicki E. Baer*
Affiliation:
Of the Michigan Bar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Sovereign Compulsion Defense in Antitrust Litigation: New Life for the Act of State Doctrine?
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 72 , 1978 , pp. 110 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Interamerican Refining Corp. v. Texaco Maracaibo, Inc., 307 F.Supp. 1291 (D. Del. 1970). Mr. Rosenthal's response refers to ANTITRUST DIVISION, U.S. DEP't OF JUSTICE, ANTITRUST GUIDE 50-52 (1977). The ensuing discussion also centered around this publication.

2 United States v. Sisal Sales Corp., 274 U.S. 268 (1927).

3 American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 U.S. 347 (1909).

4 Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp., 370 U.S. 790 (1962).

5 Victory Transport, Inc. v. Comisaria General de Abastecimientos y Transportes, 336 F.2d 354 (2d Cir. 1964), cert, denied, 381 U.S. 934 (1965).

6 Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F.Supp. 92 (CD. Calif. 1971), aff'd per curiam, 461 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 409 U.S. 950 (1972).