Two recent antitrust cases in China indicate that country may be inching its way toward fulfilling its potential as a modern economy by embracing competition law.

It was only in August 2008 that the world’s third largest economy joined the ranks of countries with private competition law regimes with China’s adoption of its new Anti-Monopoly Law (AML).

The AML generally resembles the basic framework of the American and European antitrust regimes, in the sense that it sets forth broad guidelines for dominant-firm conduct, collusion and mergers and acquisitions.  And it allows private parties – not just the government – to enforce the law through lawsuits.  Recent outcomes in two such cases suggest that private litigation under the AML will be robust, giving Chinese lawyers no shortage of work.

The Shanda-Sursen case, decided on October 23, 2009, produced the first court decision interpreting the AML’s dominant-firm provisions. click here for more »

A group of California pharmacies seeking to block Pfizer’s proposed buyout of Wyeth has already filled the prescription for an amended complaint in response to last week’s dismissal of their suit alleging the deal would be unhealthy for competition and jobs.

U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney in San Francisco had given the pharmacies until Nov. 6 to cure their complaint, which she dismissed for failing to show in which product markets the acquisition would eliminate competition.  The deal has already received FTC approval.

One representative of the California Pharmacists Association claimed the acquisition would “create the largest pharmaceutical company in the world,” thus giving it power to raise drug prices.  A Pfizer representative countered that the suit was “without merit.” click here for more »

Sports leagues and other joint ventures may score an antitrust victory in the Supreme Court this term that makes the Baseball Antitrust Exemption look strictly minor league.

The Supreme Court will hear the case of American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League, which concerns the NFL’s practice of licensing NFL and team logos and other intellectual property exclusively through the NFL’s wholly-owned subsidiary, NFL Properties LLC.

At issue is the extent to which joint ventures, like the NFL, can be considered “single entities” under antitrust law—as opposed to multiple, collectively-acting ball clubs—and thus not held subject to the anticonspiracy prohibitions of § 1 of the Sherman Act.  American Needle thus has the potential to be a watershed case in antitrust analysis of sports leagues and other joint ventures. click here for more »

Discover Financial Services more than tripled its profits in the third fiscal quarter 2009, due in part to the antitrust settlement that Constantine Cannon and co-counsel secured last year. According to Discover’s quarterly financial statement, the company’s profits included approximately $287 million (after tax) in settlement payments relating to this lawsuit. 

In October 2008, Discover recovered $2.75 billion – the third-largest antitrust recovery in world history – from Visa and MasterCard.  This settlement was the result of a lawsuit alleging that the defendants illegally blocked Discover from issuing credit and debit cards through banks.  Discover’s lawsuit followed a successful action against Visa and MasterCard by the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice, which proved that the defendants had violated the antitrust laws.

For more information about this successful recovery, click here.