Spectrum Stores Inc. v. Citgo Petroleum Corp
Case Brief – Extra Credit Citation: SPECTRUM STORES INC, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION; SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY, accomplishing business as Saudi Aramco; Defendants-Appellees. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. 632 F. 3d 938 (2011) Facts: Gasoline retailers accused the OPEC affiliate nations of fix appraisement of awkward oil and aesthetic petroleum articles in the US. The appellants argued that the commune cloister mischaracterized their complaint as alleging a cabal amid absolute nations to fix prices via production.
They argued that the circumscribed complaint alleges that bartering corporations, rather than governments, accept taken over the assembly of awkward oil. Under the act of accompaniment doctrine, "the courts of one country will not sit in acumen on the acts of the government of an-other, done aural its own territory. " The appellees accept met their accountability of demonstrating that agreement of this clothing would necessarily alarm into catechism the acts of adopted governments with account to corruption of their accustomed resources.
The cloister barred the claims, and had to accede adopted action of the political branches, which was not codification in a accord that the cloister was alone asked to interpret. By anticipation the case, the console would charge to reexamine analytical adopted action decisions Issue: Are the OPEC affiliate nation’s oil companies committing antitrust cabal by amount acclimation of awkward oil and petroleum articles in the US?
Decision: For the above reasons, the United States cloister beneath to sit in acumen of the acts of the adopted states that comprise OPEC and apprenticed that the commune court’s acumen of adjournment be affirmed. Reason: The antitrust cabal declared by plaintiffs arises from the Absolute Acts of Adopted States. To aphorism for plaintiffs on their antitrust claims would crave a cloister to aphorism on the amends of the Adopted Absolute Acts of Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia. These cases do not activate the territorial limitation or a accessible bartering action barring of the Act of Accompaniment Doctrine.
Order a unique copy of this paper