On July 31, in the waning days of the 112th Congress, Senator
Patrick Leahy of Vermont introduced the "Criminal Antitrust
Anti-Retaliation Act," designated as S. 3462. The bill is
designed to protect employees, contractors, subcontractors and
agents from retaliation for providing information to the federal
government about possible violations of the antitrust laws.
Specifically, the bill would make it unlawful for an employer to
"demote, suspend, threaten, harass or discriminate
against" an individual who assists the Department of Justice
in connection with an antitrust investigation. As a remedy, the
whistleblower will be permitted to bring an action seeking (1)
reinstatement with the same seniority status the whistleblower
would have had absent the discrimination; (2) back pay, with
interest; and (3) compensation for any special damages sustained,
including litigation costs, expert witness fees and reasonable
attorney's fees. Notably, however, "whistleblower"
status will not be afforded to any individual found to have
"planned and initiated" the violation or attempted to do
so.
As yet, no action has been taken on the bill since its
introduction (not surprising, given that Congress has been on its
summer recess almost since the date of introduction). Given the
largely noncontroversial nature of the bill, however, it would not
be surprising if it gets attached to some other piece of
legislation that Congress needs to take up before the end of the
session as an amendment and gets enacted through that process. Stay
tuned.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
A well-attended program on antitrust treatment of "bundled pricing" and "loyalty discounts" at the American Bar Association Antitrust Section Spring Meeting highlighted the confusion generated by the antitrust law implications.
An interesting and growing debate in the antitrust arena is whether most favored nation ("MFN") pricing provisions are pro-competitive or anticompetitive. For many years, MFN provisions have been considered a fairly noncontroversial contract term included by purchasers in an attempt to assure that other buyers do not receive a more favorable price.
Nearly a year ago the Kansas Supreme Court issued a ruling that boldly separated Kansas, and its state antitrust law, from prevailing federal antitrust precedent in matters of resale price agreements.
In remarks made this week at the International Competition Network annual conference, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairwoman Edith Ramirez stated that health care will continue to be a top priority for the FTC.
During calendar year 2012, there were 283 cases notified to the European Commission’s Directorate General for Competition under Council Regulation No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings.
The EU General Court has overturned part of the European Commission's infringement decision against 24 European copyright collecting societies, in the so-called CISAC case.
The U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") has reached a settlement with Anheuser-Busch InBev ("ABI") and Grupo Modelo S.A.B. de C.V. ("Modelo"), requiring ABI to divest Modelo’s entire U.S. business to Constellation Brands Inc. ("Constellation").
Twitter
Facebook
Digg 
