Laker Airways Ltd. v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
731 F.2d 909 (1984)
- Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD
Facts
Laker Airways Ltd. (Laker) (plaintiff), a British company, operated low-cost flights between London and New York. Laker’s primary customers and creditors were American. Laker claimed that Sabena, KLM, British Airways, British Caledonian, and other domestic and foreign airlines (collectively, Sabena) (defendants) conspired to charge lower prices for the same routes Laker operated, diverted business away from Laker, and pressured Laker’s lenders not to refinance loans. Laker alleged it was forced into bankruptcy as a result. Laker brought an antitrust suit against Sabena in a United States district court. The United States’ antitrust laws conferred jurisdiction in a U.S. court if the alleged wrongful conduct was intended to, and resulted in, substantial effects within the United States. By contrast, United Kingdom laws were designed to thwart implementation of U.S. antitrust laws in order to protect foreign interests. Sabena obtained an injunction in the United Kingdom enjoining Laker from pursuing the federal-court action. Laker then requested the district court to enjoin Sabena from obtaining an antisuit injunction in the United Kingdom. The district court granted the injunction against Sabena. Sabena appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wilkey, J.)
Dissent (Starr, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.