English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The antitrust laws provide both criminal and civil remedies. Section i of the Sherman Act makes every contract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade illegal. It provides that every person who violates the section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and subject to fine or imprisonment. Section 2 provides that every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with other persons to monopolize any part of trade or commerce among the several states shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, likewise punishable by fine or imprisonment. In addition to these criminal provisions, the district courts are given jurisdiction to entertain equity suits to prevent or restrain violations of law through the issuance of injunctions. I The criminal remedy is essentially coercive. It penalizes past illegal conduct. It operates as a deterrent against repetitions of such conduct. The Sherman Act in its present form is fundamentally a criminal statute. The civil remedies are supplemental for the purpose of furnishing additional redress where the facts call for it. It is the announced policy of the Department of Justice, unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary, to bring criminal actions rather than suits for injunction where the evidence indicates that illegal acts have been committed. In particular situations, there may be extenuating circumstances which warrant the Department in bringing civil suits instead of criminal suits, such as long continued acquiescence on the part of the Government in the commission of the illegal acts. But in general there can be few reasons for failing to present evidence of criminal violation to a grand jury. The Department should not take the responsibility of declining to present evidence in a criminal prosecution where it has that evidence in its possession. There has been much confusion of thought upon this subject. It seems to be the view of some people that, despite the fact that the statute makes violations misdemeanors, nevertheless the criminal procedure should not often be used. These people, however, do not expect that prosecuting attorneys under other criminal

Remedies Available to the Government under the Sherman Act