scholarly journals Restraint of Trade by the Supreme Court: The Utah Pie Case

1967 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ward S. Bowman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

11. Illegality

2020 ◽  
pp. 405-434
Author(s):  
Jack Beatson ◽  
Andrew Burrows ◽  
John Cartwright
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

This chapter considers what counts as illegality and the effect of illegality on a contract (and consequent restitution). The approach of the Courts to illegality has been transformed for the better, and simplified, by the Supreme Court in Patel v Mirza in 2016. Illegal conduct, tainting a contract, can vary widely from serious crimes (eg murder) to relatively minor crimes (eg breach of licensing requirements) through to civil wrongs and to conduct that does not comprise a wrong but is contrary to public policy. As regards the effect of illegality, where a statute does not deal with this, the common law approach is now to apply a range of factors. A final section of the chapter examines contracts in restraint of trade.

22. Illegality and restraint of trade

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Business ◽  
Illegal Acts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

This chapter analyses the law on illegality and restraint of trade. The law on illegality is very complicated. Illegal acts vary greatly in range and severity. The Supreme Court has recently held that a ‘range of factors’ need to be considered when deciding whether the claimant’s illegality should defeat a claim, and it is likely that the law will become increasingly flexible in this area. Restraint of trade is concerned with balancing the competing rights of private parties, notably the employer’s right to expect a certain degree of loyalty as regards his business against the employee’s freedom to leave his employment and to undertake new business activities. The key consideration tends to be whether restraint of trade clauses are reasonable.

22. Illegality and restraint of trade

2021 ◽  
pp. 320-337
Author(s):  
Paul S. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Business ◽  
Illegal Acts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

This chapter analyses the law on illegality and restraint of trade. The law on illegality is very complicated. Illegal acts vary greatly in range and severity. The Supreme Court has recently held that a ‘range of factors’ need to be considered when deciding whether the claimant’s illegality should defeat a claim, and it is likely that the law will become increasingly flexible in this area. Restraint of trade is concerned with balancing the competing rights of private parties, notably the employer’s right to expect a certain degree of loyalty as regards their business against the employee’s freedom to leave their employment and to undertake new business activities. The key consideration tends to be whether restraint of trade clauses are reasonable.

The Effect of Business Conditions on Early Judicial Decisions Concerning Restraint of Trade

1950 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-44
Author(s):  
Thomas S. Berry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Associations ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Main Track ◽  
Business Conditions ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

It appears to legal historians that the Supreme Court of the United States must have gone off the main track in 1933 when it handed down the celebrated Appalachian Coals decision upholding a joint selling agency. Only six years before, the Court had condemned a similar collective arrangement maintained by the Trenton Potteries; and seven years later, in 1940, the Court rendered a decision in the Socony-Vacuum Oil Case that revealed an abrupt return to its generally firm attitude toward collective action on the part of business concerns. Indeed, it is difficult if not impossible to reconcile the 1933 Appalachian Coals decision with the 1940 Socony-Vacuum Oil decision, and, as prices rose and shortages developed during the 1940's, the judicial attitude toward restraint of trade in various forms became progressively stiffer and stiffer. A parallel shift in the climate of court opinion against trade associations can be noted in the 1920's by comparing the decisions near the beginning of the decade, when trade was lax and prices were soft, with those a few years later when prosperity was again in evidence. One might even pose the question: Do the courts follow business conditions, as they are alleged to follow the election returns?

2. Contracts of employment

2021 ◽  
pp. 13-34
Author(s):  
Michael Jefferson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Confidential Information ◽  
Employment Contracts ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Contract Of Employment ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses employment contracts. Covenants potentially in restraint of trade are express written terms which may apply during the contract, but are usually expressed to apply after termination. They are a rare illustration of contractual terms, which must be in writing. The general purpose of these is to prevent a former employee competing against his former employers; for example, by taking commercially confidential information or influencing customers to give their business to the firm he has joined. The Supreme Court has recently ruled on the width of the doctrine of severance of such covenants. Topics covered include the provision of the written statement, a right which employees have enjoyed since 1963, but which was extended to workers in 2020; the sources of terms in employment contracts; duties of the employer; and duties of the employee. These duties or implied terms are divided into terms implied in law (ie inserted into every contract of employment) and terms implied in fact (ie inserted into a particular contract of employment). The latter are divided into terms implied in fact which work against the employers’ interests and terms which work against the employees’ interests. Examples of the former include the duty to pay wages; examples of the latter include the duty to obey reasonable orders.

The battle of the tests: a Pyrrhic victory? A case note on the Supreme Court judgment in Peninsula Securities Ltd v. Dunnes Stores (Bangor) Ltd

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 143-150
Author(s):  
Mark Jephcott ◽  
◽  
Max Kaufman ◽  
Ben Gordon ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Shopping Centre ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
Restraint Of Trade ◽  
Pyrrhic Victory

In Peninsula Securities, the Supreme Court held that a restrictive covenant, granted in a lease to an anchor tenant of a shopping centre not to allow any retail unit in the centre to be leased to competing shops, does not engage the doctrine of restraint of trade. The question of its enforceability therefore hinges on whether the relevant covenant breaches competition law, and specifically whether it is anti-competitive by object or effect. This relatively straightforward conclusion of the Supreme Court in Peninsula Securities masks over 50 years of conflicting judgments and uncertainty in the area. Prior to Peninsula Securities, the majority decision of the House of Lords in Esso Petroleum v Harper's Garage gave rise to a ‘battle of the tests’: the majority opined that the doctrine of restraint of trade would only be engaged if the covenantor contracts to give up a freedom they already had (what has come to be known as the ‘pre-existing freedom test’; Lord Wilberforce, dissenting, formulated what came to be known as the ‘trading society test’ which is basically a rule of reason test. In Peninsula Securities, the Supreme Court clearly sided with the latter, but in reality neither test is likely to be considered in future challenges to an anchor tenancy restrictive covenant – the key question is whether it is anti-competitive, something which only the relevant facts of the case will determine.

Value and Logic in Elementary Mathematics

1930 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-18
Author(s):  
Fletcher Durell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Elementary Mathematics ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
United States Steel Corporation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Trust Law ◽  
Restraint Of Trade

About fifteen years ago our National Government brought suit for the dissolution of the United States Steel Corporation on the ground that this organization was a combination in restraint of trade and therefore was operating in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law. In the year 1919 the final decision in this case was made by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Malpractice & Negligence: Cal. Supreme Court Clarifies Negligence Provisions under State’s Elder Abuse Act

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-203
Author(s):  
Kendra Carlson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Elder Abuse ◽  
Skilled Nursing Facility ◽  
Pressure Sores ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Nursing Facility ◽  
Skilled Nursing ◽  
The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of California held, in Delaney v. Baker, 82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 610 (1999), that the heightened remedies available under the Elder Abuse Act (Act), Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 15657,15657.2 (West 1998), apply to health care providers who engage in reckless neglect of an elder adult. The court interpreted two sections of the Act: (1) section 15657, which provides for enhanced remedies for reckless neglect; and (2) section 15657.2, which limits recovery for actions based on “professional negligence.” The court held that reckless neglect is distinct from professional negligence and therefore the restrictions on remedies against health care providers for professional negligence are inapplicable.Kay Delaney sued Meadowood, a skilled nursing facility (SNF), after a resident, her mother, died. Evidence at trial indicated that Rose Wallien, the decedent, was left lying in her own urine and feces for extended periods of time and had stage I11 and IV pressure sores on her ankles, feet, and buttocks at the time of her death.

Medical and Legal Issues Raised by the Protz Decision Issued by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-13
Author(s):  
LuAnn Haley ◽  
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Complex Concept ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Compensation Claims ◽  
Recent Edition ◽  
Impairment Ratings ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Pennsylvania adopted the impairment rating provisions described in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) in 1996 as an exposure cap for employers seeking predictability and cost control in workers’ compensation claims. In 2017, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania handed down the Protz decision, which held that requiring physicians to apply the methodology set forth in the most recent edition of the AMA Guides reflected an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the American Medical Association. The decision eliminates the impairment-rating evaluation (IRE) mechanism under which claimants were assigned an impairment rating under the most recent edition of the AMA Guides. The AMA Guides periodically are revised to include the most recent scientific evidence regarding impairment ratings, and the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, acknowledges that impairment is a complex concept that is not yet defined in a way that readily permits an evidence-based definition of assessment. The AMA Guides should not be considered standards frozen in time simply to withstand future scrutiny by the courts; instead, workers’ compensation acts could state that when a new edition of the AMA Guides is published, the legislature shall review and consider adopting the new edition. It appears unlikely that the Protz decision will be followed in other jurisdictions: Challenges to using the AMA Guides in assessing workers’ compensation claims have been attempted in three states, and all attempts failed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document