Franchise Legislation: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly,...90-1, Pursuant to S. Res. 26, on S. 2507, S. 2321, October 10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 31; November 1, 1967
1968 - 553 lappuses
Lietotāju komentāri - Rakstīt atsauksmi
Ierastajās vietās neesam atraduši nevienu atsauksmi.
action addition agree agreement American antitrust arbitration arrangements Association automobile believe bill cancellation cars cash register cause Chairman chise Chrysler COHEN committee compete competition concerned considered consumer continue contract cost court customers damages deal dealer dealership direct distribution distributor district economic effect equipment established existing facilities fact failure fair faith Ford fran franchise franchise agreement franchisor give going goodwill hearings independent industry interest investment involved lease legislation limited manager manufacturer matter means ment months Motors operation parties percent performance person plaintiffs practices present president problems profit proposed protection purchase question reason record relation relationship representatives result retail rules sell Senator HART situation statement station suggested termination Thank tion United wholesaler
246. lappuse - That any person, firm, corporation, or association shall be entitled to sue for and have injunctive relief, in any court of the United States having jurisdiction over the parties, against threatened loss or damage by a violation of the antitrust laws...
520. lappuse - That any person who shall be injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue therefor in any district court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.
78. lappuse - In witness whereof the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed by their respective officers the day and year first above written.
174. lappuse - States having jurisdiction over the parties, against threatened loss or damage by a violation of the anti-trust laws, including sections two, three, seven and eight of this Act, when and under the same conditions and principles as injunctive relief against threatened conduct that will cause loss or damage is granted by courts of equity, under the rules governing such proceedings...
375. lappuse - To supplement the antitrust laws of the United States, in order to balance the power now heavily weighted in favor of automobile manufacturers, by enabling franchise automobile dealers to bring suit in the district courts of the United States to recover damages sustained by reason of the failure of automobile manufacturers to act in good faith in complying with the terms of franchises or in terminating or not renewing franchises with their dealers.
490. lappuse - We do not know enough of the economic and business stuff out of which these arrangements emerge to be certain. They may be too dangerous to sanction or they may be allowable protections against aggressive competitors or the only practicable means a small company has for breaking into or staying in business (cf. Brown Shoe, supra, at 330; United States v. Jerrold Electronics Corp., 187 F. Supp. 545, 560-561, aff'd, 365 US 567) and within the "rule of reason.
94. lappuse - Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.