Tiêu đề Session 5 AK (PPT).pptx ✅

Noerr-Pennington doctrine The US Supreme Court, over the past 45 years, has shaped what is now referred to as the Noerr-Pennington doctrine through a series of rulings that clarify how the Sherman Act applies to both individual and collective attempts to influence government action. It seems to stem from an interpretation of the Sherman Act aimed at preventing conflict with the constitutional right to petition the government and supporting the principle of effective governmental decision-making.
Noerr-Pennington immunity The Noerr-Pennington immunity is a limited exemption from antitrust liability for certain actions by individuals or groups that are intending with that action to influence government decision-making, which can be legislative, executive, or judicial. Noerr-Pennington immunity developed from two cases in 1960s: Eastern Railroad Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, 365 U.S. 127 (1961) and United Mine Workers of America v. Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 (1965. From here the doctrine took off and was expanded to other contexts.
Eastern Railroad Presidents’ Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 The Supreme Court addressed whether coordinated efforts to influence legislation could violate the Sherman Act Trucking companies sued railroads and their PR firm for conspiring to monopolize freight transport. Allegations included a campaign to promote anti-trucking legislation and disparage truckers publicly. The Court ruled that the Sherman Act does not prohibit joint efforts to persuade the government to impose regulations that may harm competitors The Court held, (1) the Sherman Act does not prohibit efforts to influence the passage and enforcement of laws; and (2) insofar as disparagement to customers and the public was alleged to be part of a strategy to influence legislation and law enforcement, such disparagement was “incidental” to petitioning and therefore protected as well.