Legal, Political, Ethical Dimensions of Business, Case Study Example

1. Is such conduct illegal under the Sherman Act? Why or why not?

The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was created in order to protect the business activities that were being anti-competitive where companies began to form monopolies that can tend to raise the prices of consumer goods. Activities made by companies the can create anticompetitive practices. In the case of Inglis v ITT Continental Banking, from Inglis perspective it could possibility be a predatory price scheme, however, it can’t be proven unless Continental is intentionally lowering prices to drive out competition and keep new ones from entering. This would be considered anti-competitive behavior which is illegal. For Inglis to have a case he must had to prove that Continental placed their private label bread below the marginal costs, which is hard to prove if intentional or due to the changes in the market.

2. Is predatory pricing a per se violation? [William Inglis v ITT Continental Baking Co., 668 F.2d 1014 (9th Cir. 1980)]

Yes, when the business is within the same industry, it is usually referred to as a horizontal alignment. The per se violation is imposed by the judge by looking at the number of factors that include, the competition, the position of the competition in the industry, and the ability for the competition to respond to the challenged practiced. Predatory pricing would be considering restricting trade and is found to be illegal. That is a direct violation of the Sherman Act and if proven, Inglis could win his case.

CASE QUESTIONS

1. List the violations of the TILA that Chevy Chase Bank made.

Presented in this case, there are several violations that can be pointed out against Chevy Chase Bank. The first being what was already pointed out was, they failed to properly disclose loan requirements. TILA requires, “clear, conspicuous, and accurate disclosures of loan terms set forth in the Content of Disclosures. In the case the defendant said that by having the sentence that gave the option of payments was a disclosure. However to the untrained eye a regular consumer would have missed the information since it was printed auspiciously smaller than the other print. Not having all the information grouped together for the consumer to read is a violation of TILA, because the consumer is not properly disclosed of all the information that is group together with discussion of the monthly payments. The bank failed to provide a clear APR for the loan, and not only confused the court but also the plaintiff in clearly outlining the interest rates, and the regular monthly payment. A statement that the monthly payment and the interest rate will escalate.

2. Explain the remedies the Andrews are entitled to and which they are not.

Due to the violations that are described under TILA, the Andrews are due to the entitled remedies that include, that the defendant must pay all court and attorney fees, they are entitled to statutory damages. Since the Andrews took individual action they receive a finance charge that is computed according to the rules in the TILA which are paid up to $2,000 and other monetary damages. Which includes any charge that is directly payable by the creditor or bank as condition of the extension of credit. Insurance premiums are a possible remedy as well, and the taxes and fees be paid for the release of the lien. If they were to sue in a class action they would be entitled to has a maximum of $500,000 or 1% of the creditor’ net worth unlike individual actions.