Opinion ID: 433759
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Territorial Contacts Justifying Application of United States Antitrust Law.

Text: 47 The circumstances of this litigation suggest numerous American interests that would be vindicated if Laker is permitted to proceed with its antitrust claim. Although some of the alleged anticompetitive actions occurred within the United States, 33 most of the conspiratorial acts took place in other countries. This distinction, however, has no overriding significance, since the economic consequences of the alleged actions gravely impair significant American interests. If the only interest involved were that of Laker, a British corporation, then it may very well be that United States jurisdiction to prescribe would not exist. However, Laker is in liquidation. Therefore its interests are only nominal compared to those claiming through it. 48 A primary objective of antitrust laws is to preserve competition, and thus ultimately protect the interests of American consumers. 34 For decades, a great percentage of passengers on North Atlantic air routes has been United States citizens. 35 The greatest impact of a predatory pricing conspiracy would be to raise fares for United States passengers. No other single nation has nearly the same interest in consumer protection on the particular combination of routes involved in Laker's antitrust claims. Application of antitrust laws would thus directly benefit American consumers. 49 Because Laker is currently being liquidated, the claims of its creditors are even more directly at stake than consumer interests. Laker is now little more than a corporate conduit through which its assets, including any damages owed Laker, will pass to its creditors. Its antitrust action is primarily an effort to satisfy its creditors, who ultimately bear the brunt of the injury allegedly inflicted upon Laker. 50 Although the precipitous actions of the British airline defendants prevented the district court from conducting a thorough inquiry into the underlying facts relevant to this aspect of the litigation, the facts indicate that Laker's principal creditors are Americans. Laker's fleet of American manufactured DC-10 aircraft was largely financed by banks and other lending institutions in the United States. 36 Moreover, a substantial portion of its total debt obligations are likely to have been American, since the bulk of the debts and expenses were payable in American dollars. 37 The actions of the alleged conspirators destroyed the ability of Laker to repay these American creditors; any antitrust recovery will therefore benefit these United States interests. 51 In addition to the protection of American consumers' and creditors' interests, the United States has a substantial interest in regulating the conduct of business within the United States. The landing rights granted to appellants are permits to do business in this country. Foreign airlines fly in the United States on the prerequisite of obeying United States law. 38 They have offices and employees within the United States, and conduct substantial operations here. By engaging in this commercial business they subject themselves to the in personam jurisdiction of the host country's courts. They waive either expressly or implicitly other objections that might otherwise be raised in defense. 39 A major reason for this subjection to business regulation is to place foreign corporations generally in the same position as domestic businesses. 40 Thus, United States creditors are entitled to, and do, rely on their ability to enforce their claims against foreign corporations like the appellants. 52 This equivalency works in both directions. Foreign corporations are privileged to, and do, rely on United States law. 41 Consequently, creditors rely on the ability of foreign corporations, not only to be sued, but to sue in courts. Creditors expect to recover claims derivatively when foreign corporations possess a claim. Foreign corporations thus have the same obligation as domestic corporations--to sue for benefit of creditors when they are financially troubled and need money for satisfaction of creditors' claims. 42 53 The United States has an interest in maintaining open forums for resolution of creditors' claims. Just as the appellants are expected to abide by the United States laws governing those who do business here, so is Laker entitled to the protection of those laws. Permitting Laker to maintain its antitrust suit satisfies the legitimate expectations of Laker and its creditors. 54