Connecticut
How Caribbean Broadcasting System, Ltd. v. Cable & Wireless PLC applies in Connecticut: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Antitrust.
Connecticut law mirrors federal antitrust principles, particularly in addressing anti-competitive conduct. The state emphasizes the need for demonstrable harm to competition rather than mere injury to competitors.
The Connecticut Antitrust Act, Sec. 35-28, prohibits contracts or conspiracies that unreasonably restrain trade or commerce.
Held that predatory pricing could be considered anti-competitive behavior under the Connecticut Antitrust Act.
Recognized the importance of showing substantial market power in proving violations of the antitrust statutes.
Affirmed that agreements among competitors to fix prices can constitute anti-competitive behavior under state law.
Connecticut's antitrust laws closely align with federal standards under the Sherman Act and Clayton Act, particularly in evaluating anti-competitive practices. However, Connecticut's statutes explicitly cover additional forms of anti-competitive behavior, reflecting a broader interpretation of what constitutes a restraint of trade.
Antitrust principles including those illustrated in Caribbean Broadcasting System, Ltd. v. Cable & Wireless PLC are commonly tested on the Connecticut bar exam, particularly regarding market power and unfair competition.