翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Noen Kum ・ Noen Maprang ・ Noen Maprang District ・ Noen Maprang Subdistrict ・ Noen Phoem ・ Noen Sa-nga District ・ Noengrothai Chaipetch ・ Noenoe Silva ・ Noepoli ・ NoePrimer ・ Noer ・ Noer Alie ・ Noerdange ・ Noerine Kaleeba ・ Noerr ・ Noerr-Pennington doctrine ・ Noertrange ・ Noertzange ・ Noertzange railway station ・ Noesa Penida ・ Noesis (disambiguation) ・ Noesis (online journal) ・ Noesis Cultural Society ・ Noether ・ Noether identities ・ Noether inequality ・ Noether Lecture ・ Noether normalization lemma ・ Noether's second theorem ・ Noether's theorem Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Noerr-Pennington doctrine ： ウィキペディア英語版 Noerr-Pennington doctrine Under the ''Noerr-Pennington'' doctrine, private entities are immune from liability under the antitrust laws for attempts to influence the passage or enforcement of laws, even if the laws they advocate for would have anticompetitive effects. ''Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.'', ; ''United Mine Workers v. Pennington'', . The doctrine is grounded in the First Amendment protection of political speech, and "upon a recognition that the antitrust laws, 'tailored as they are for the business world, are not at all appropriate for application in the political arena.' " ''City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc.'', (quoting ''Noerr'', . ==Origins== The doctrine was set forth by the United States Supreme Court in ''Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.'', 365 U.S. 127 (1961) and ''United Mine Workers v. Pennington'', 381 U.S. 657 (1965). The Court later expanded on the doctrine in ''California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited'', 404 U.S. 508 (1972). In ''Noerr'', the Court held that "no violation of the () Act can be predicated upon mere attempts to influence the passage or enforcement of laws". Similarly, the Court wrote in ''Pennington'' that "()oint efforts to influence public officials do not violate the antitrust laws even though intended to eliminate competition." Finally, in ''California Motor Transport'', the Court added that "the right to petition extends to all departments of the Government () ()he right of access to the courts is indeed but one aspect of the right of petition." Pursuant to this doctrine, immunity extends to attempts to petition all departments of the government. And "if . . . conduct constitutes valid petitioning, the petitioner is immune from antitrust liability whether or not the injuries are caused by the act of petitioning or are caused by government action which results from the petitioning." ''A.d. Bedell Wholesale Company v. Philip Morris Incorporated''., 263 F.3d at 251. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Noerr-Pennington doctrine」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.