Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog

Editor: D. Daniel Sokol
University of Florida
Levin College of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Another Look at Process: Is There Really a Difference between Merger Litigation at the Agencies?

Posted by D. Daniel Sokol

Kyle Andeer (FTC) asks, Another Look at Process: Is There Really a Difference between Merger Litigation at the Agencies?

ABSTRACT: The FTC has emphasized its unique role in antitrust enforcement and its administrative proceedings in these recent cases. Its position is grounded in the text of its authorizing statutes, Congressional intent, and longstanding legal precedent. Nevertheless, the FTC has been subjected to harsh criticism by some in the defense bar, arguing that the emphasis placed on the Commission’s administrative role and the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Whole Foods place the FTC in a stronger position to challenge mergers than the DOJ. That, in turn, leads to a higher hurdle for mergers at the FTC than it at the DOJ. Some urge the FTC to treat the preliminary injunction hearing in federal court as a de facto hearing on the merits.

This not only ignores the Congressional intent behind the FTC but it is not at all clear that expedited proceedings on the merits before lay judges is the best model to decide merger challenges.


http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2009/05/another-look-at-process-is-there-really-a-difference-between-merger-litigation-at-the-agencies.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0115706db479970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another Look at Process: Is There Really a Difference between Merger Litigation at the Agencies?:

Comments

Post a comment