Related Stories
State Supreme Court allows price-fixing suit
Key Excerpts from Article on Website of San Francisco Chronicle (San Francisco's leading newspaper)
Posted: July 19th, 2010
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/12/...
California retailers who accuse manufacturers of scheming to inflate prices scored a significant legal victory [on July 12] when the state Supreme Court allowed them to sue for triple damages despite their ability to pass higher charges along to customers. The court unanimously reinstated a price-fixing suit by a group of pharmacies that accused major drug companies of conspiring to overcharge purchasers by as much as 400 percent from 2000 to 2004. While denying the allegations, the companies also argued that pharmacists could avoid any damages by raising their own prices. Overturning lower-court rulings that dismissed the suit, the court said a "pass-on" defense - allowing manufacturers to avoid damages for illegal overcharges that could be passed on to consumers - is unavailable in California. Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar ... said enforcement of the law is promoted by allowing a retailer or wholesaler who buys directly from the manufacturer to seek damages - tripled under antitrust law - for overcharges caused by price-fixing. If such suits were prohibited, Werdegar said, overcharged retailers would have to choose between absorbing the losses or raising their prices and potentially losing sales. Such a ban might allow manufacturers to fix prices with impunity, Werdegar said, because individual consumers' losses might be too small to make a suit worthwhile.
Note: The ruling in Clayworth vs. Pfizer, S166435, can be viewed at www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S166435.PDF.
Related Stories
Latest News
Key News Articles from Years Past
