Herbert Hovenkamp, Apr 01, 2006
The success of the Areeda-Turner test for predatory pricing and the U.S. Supreme Court’s adoption of demanding proof requirements in its 1993 Brooke Group decision have made it very difficult for plaintiffs to win conventional predatory pricing claims. While many challenges to exclusionary pricing continue to be made, the legal theory has evolved away from classical predation to a variety of other theories. This paper examines the state of the law of both conventional predatory pricing and these recent variants and offers some recommendations.
Featured News
American Express Loses Appeal Seeking Arbitration of Merchants’ Antitrust Claims
Aug 20, 2026 by
CPI
Portugal Rail Market Faces Competition Push as Regulator Targets Barriers
Aug 20, 2026 by
CPI
France Fines Boohoo €2.3 Million as Scrutiny of Fast-Fashion Pricing Intensifies
Aug 20, 2026 by
CPI
California AG Seeks Structural Fixes in Paramount-Warner Antitrust Fight
Aug 20, 2026 by
CPI
Australia Targets Big Tech With New Levy to Fund Local News
Aug 20, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Antitrust Compliance
Jul 20, 2026 by
CPI
Your Antitrust Compliance Program: A Strong Voice in Your Defense
Jul 20, 2026 by
Joe Murphy
Antitrust Compliance for the AI Pricing Era
Jul 20, 2026 by
Alejandra Uria & Andre Geverola
Race to Report: Antitrust Leniency in the Whistleblower Era
Jul 20, 2026 by
Brian R. Faerstein & Nicole H. Sprinzen
Antitrust-By-Design: Competition Compliance in Digital Markets
Jul 20, 2026 by
Marcos Drummond Malvar, Gabriela Costa Carvalho Forsman & Luciana Mendes