Document Type
Article
Publication Title
Tulane Law Review
Publication Date
1987
Volume
61
First Page
777
Abstract
(Excerpt)
Since the passage of the Sherman Act in 1890, successful plaintiffs in private antitrust actions have been entitled to recover three times the actual damages awarded. Originally embodied in section 7 of the Sherman Act, the mandatory treble damages provision was later incorporated into section 4 of the Clayton Act and made applicable to all actions in which private plaintiffs sought recovery under the federal antitrust laws. In the century since the Sherman Act became law, the antitrust debate has concentrated largely on issues of substantive liability. While the desirability of the mandatory treble damages remedy has been challenged from time to time since 1890, scholars did not seriously focus on antitrust remedies until the 1970s. In the last decade, mandatory trebling has come under intense attack from economists and legal scholars. The debate has broadened, and the detrebling movement has gathered momentum. Most recently, the Reagan Administration unveiled a package of legislative proposals calling for sweeping changes in the antitrust laws, including detrebling of damages for most antitrust violations.
Comments
Available at: https://www.tulanelawreview.org/pub/volume61/issue4/detrebling-antitrust-damages-an-idea-whose-time-has-come