rule of reason
E560329
The rule of reason is an antitrust legal doctrine that evaluates whether a business practice unreasonably restrains trade by weighing its pro-competitive benefits against its anti-competitive harms.
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
antitrust legal doctrine
ⓘ
standard of review ⓘ |
| allows |
consideration of consumer welfare impacts
ⓘ
consideration of efficiencies ⓘ |
| appliedBy |
antitrust enforcement agencies
ⓘ
courts ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
many horizontal restraints
ⓘ
restraints of trade ⓘ vertical restraints ⓘ |
| appliesUnderStatute |
Section 1 of the Sherman Act
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Sherman Antitrust Act NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| burdenShifting |
defendant may show pro-competitive justifications
ⓘ
plaintiff may show less restrictive means ⓘ plaintiff must show anticompetitive effect ⓘ |
| characteristic |
context-dependent
ⓘ
flexible ⓘ |
| considers |
actual effects on prices
ⓘ
business justifications for the restraint ⓘ definition of the relevant market ⓘ effects on innovation ⓘ effects on output ⓘ effects on quality ⓘ less restrictive alternatives ⓘ market power of the parties ⓘ |
| contrastedWith |
per se rule
ⓘ
quick look analysis ⓘ |
| evaluates |
anti-competitive effects of a practice
ⓘ
pro-competitive benefits of a practice ⓘ |
| field |
competition law
ⓘ
economic regulation ⓘ |
| furtherDevelopedInCase | Chicago Board of Trade v. United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| furtherDevelopedInCaseYear | 1918 ⓘ |
| influencedBy | economic analysis of competition ⓘ |
| keyQuestion | whether the challenged restraint unreasonably restrains trade ⓘ |
| legalSystem | common law ⓘ |
| notAppliedTo | hardcore cartels under per se rule ⓘ |
| originatedInCase | Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatedInCaseYear | 1911 ⓘ |
| purpose | to determine whether a restraint unreasonably restricts competition ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
consumer welfare standard
ⓘ
rule of reason analysis ⓘ |
| requires |
balancing of competitive harms and benefits
ⓘ
case-by-case analysis ⓘ fact-intensive inquiry ⓘ |
| requiresProofOf | actual or likely anticompetitive effects ⓘ |
| scope | broad ⓘ |
| standardOfProof | preponderance of the evidence ⓘ |
| usedIn | antitrust law ⓘ |
| usedInJurisdiction | United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
antitrust case Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States
→
introducedDoctrine
→
rule of reason
ⓘ
subject surface form:
Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States