A recent Supreme Court interpretation of the Robinson-Patman Act which, for the first time, required a seller to extend proportionally equal promotional aid to buyers at different functional levels, illustrates the uncertain nature of the scope, and, concomitantly, the defenses to sections 2(c), 2(d) and 2(e) of the Act. This note attempts to explicate the defenses that have been successfully used to rebut charges under these sections. Special emphasis is placed upon clearly delineating the elements of court and FTC favored defenses on both the merits and jurisdictional grounds to charges of section 2(c), 2(d) and 2(e) violations.

Included in

Law Commons