Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Criticism of Microsoft ruling offends EU court
World Business News | 2007/09/20 07:11

Neelie Kroes, the European Union's antitrust commissioner, termed "totally unacceptable" U.S. criticism of an EU court's ruling against Microsoft. Besides creating diplomatic friction, the U.S. Justice Department's criticism of the decision, which upheld European antitrust sanctions against Microsoft, sparked a debate among U.S. lawyers over its propriety.

These lawyers and Kroes argued that the statement issued by Justice Department antitrust chief Thomas Barnett the same day as the EU ruling disrespects the European court.

"I think it's totally unacceptable that a representative of the U.S. administration criticizes an independent court of law outside its jurisdiction," Kroes told reporters in Brussels. "It's absolutely not done. The European Commission doesn't pass judgment on rulings by U.S. courts, and we expect the same degree of respect from U.S. authorities for rulings by EU courts."

If Microsoft and other parties involved in the case "aren't happy" with the ruling, they can appeal to the European Court of Justice, the EU's highest court, Kroes said. They have two months to file an appeal.

Justice Department spokeswoman Gina Talamona declined to comment.

Barnett had criticized the Monday ruling by the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, which backed the EU's 2004 decision that ordered Microsoft to disclose proprietary data and strip music and video software from a version of Windows.

The ruling harms consumers by "chilling innovation and discouraging competition," Barnett said.

Lawyers critical of Barnett's statement said it was made in a different context from earlier Bush administration criticism of antitrust action against Microsoft by European and Korean authorities.

"Ratcheting it up as Barnett did by specifically criticizing a court decision may have touched more of a sensitive nerve," said Andrew Gavil, who teaches antitrust at Howard University's law school in Washington, D.C. Such comments "undermine the ability to develop a responsible global system of rule of law," he said.

Barnett's statement "potentially devalues the input from American policymakers" seeking to harmonize U.S. and European antitrust standards, said San Francisco lawyer Daniel Wall, who represents some of Microsoft's competitors.

This isn't the first trans-Atlantic war of words over antitrust policy.

In 2001, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill called the EU's veto of General Electric's proposed $47 billion merger with Honeywell International "off the wall." The U.S. also criticized an EU probe of IBM in the early 1980s.



[PREV] [1] ..[6171][6172][6173][6174][6175][6176][6177][6178][6179].. [8290] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..
Ford cuts 2024 earnings guid..
Kenya’s deputy president pl..
South Korean court acquits f..
Supreme Court grapples with ..
Supreme Court leaves in plac..
Kentucky sheriff accused of ..
New rules regarding election..
North Carolina appeals court..
A court in Argentina orders ..
Mexican cartel leader’s son..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design