Resale price maintenance under U.S. and E.U. antitrust law after Leegin

Abstract

The ultimate objective of this thesis is to examine resale price maintenance in the light of the pertinent Supreme Court judgement in Leegin. Furthermore, this study focuses on the effects that this judgement has stirred both on the US and the EU level particularly in relation to vertical minimum resale price maintenance. This dissertation starts off by defining the practice of ‘resale price maintenance’ and moves on to examine the pro- and anti-competitive effects that the restraint may impose from an economic perspective. Following this introductory background, this thesis analyses the historical evolution of the US legislation and case-law in relation to resale price maintenance. This overview is crucial in order to understand the significance of the Leegin decision in antitrust law today. A thorough analysis of the Leegin judgement, including principles enshrined in the decision, is also given. Furthermore, in order to understand whether the US and EU standing towards resale price maintenance is diverging or converging, this study also assesses resale price maintenance from an EU perspective, by analysing the application of EU competition law principles and evaluating relevant case-law. This dissertation gives particular importance to the post-Leegin scenario in the US. The study aims to identify whether the aftermath of this judgement has caused inconsistency or otherwise among US states and whether state laws are being enacted to overrule Leegin. Lastly, this study questions whether Leegin is the source of reforming resale price maintenance in Europe, and whether the EU approach towards resale price maintenance is truly converging with the US stance. This thesis has established that Leegin has undeniably revamped the treatment of RPM in the US by overturning a prominent 96 year old judgement advocating a per se rule in RPM cases, and has instead adopted a rule of reason approach. Leegin has since then been subject to differing interpretations and inconsistencies between the federal and state courts. Indeed, this judgement has also been of influence and has triggered change in the EU.