A federal judge in Florida has dismissed a proposed class action against Burger King that alleges that the company’s former no-poach provisions in its franchise agreements were illegal.
The judge found that Burger King franchisees were dependent on their franchisor to such an extent that they constituted a single entity akin to a parent-subsidiary corporate relationship and were incapable of conspiring to violate the antitrust laws.
The plaintiffs claimed that the no-hire provisions were “per se” unlawful. The defendants insisted that, under a “quick look analysis,” no one with a rudimentary understanding of economics could find that the no-hire provisions had anticompetitive effects on employees or labor.
Full Content: Law 360
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
French Regulator Approves FDJ’s Kindred €2.45B Acquisition with Conditions
Sep 18, 2024 by
CPI
UK Competition Authority Targets Greenwashing with New Fashion Compliance Rules
Sep 18, 2024 by
CPI
California Takes Action to Shield Performers from AI Replicas
Sep 18, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Loses Legal Battle Over EU Antitrust Fine, Court Slightly Reduces Penalty
Sep 18, 2024 by
CPI
DOJ Withdraws 1995 Bank Merger Guidelines, Affirms 2023 Standards
Sep 18, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Canada & Mexico
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competitive Convergence: Mexico’s 30-Year Quest for Antitrust Parity with its Northern Neighbor
Sep 3, 2024 by
Francisco Javier Núñez Melgoza
Competition and Digital Markets in North America: A Comparative Study of Antitrust Investigations in Mexico and the United States
Sep 3, 2024 by
Julio Garcia
Recent Antitrust Development in Mexico: COFECE’s Preliminary Report on Amazon and Mercado Libre
Sep 3, 2024 by
Alejandra Palacios Prieto
The Cost of Making COFECE Disappear
Sep 3, 2024 by
Mateo Fernández