1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Elena L [17]
4 years ago
14

PharMax, a pharmaceutical manufacturer, sells its drugs for use in not-for-profit hospitals at a lower wholesale price than the

price given to commercial pharmacies. CPC Inc., a commercial pharmacy chain, files suit alleging a violation of the price discrimination laws. What is the likely outcome of the suit?
Law
1 answer:
Radda [10]4 years ago
6 0

Answer:

CPC Inc. will probably lose the suit.

Explanation:

The Robinson-Patman Act contains the regulations that govern price discrimination. The purpose of this Act is to prevent unfair competition. The Act sets forth that a business must sell its products at the same price regardless of who the purchaser is. However, in the question at issue, there is a not-for-profit hospital involved, which is the buyer of the drugs. In this case, PharMax may resort to the Non-Profit Institutions Act (NPIA), which is the exemption to the Robinson–Patman Act referred to above, and claim that according to the NPIA, pharmaceutical manufacturers are entitled to sell hospitals, libraries and universities (non-profit institutions), discounted products. As a consequence, the hospital shall receive the drugs at a lower price than that charged to other retail pharmacy.

To sum up, there is no violation of the price discrimination laws and CPC Inc. will lose the lawsuit.  

You might be interested in
Which source of law helped to shape the creation of international public law?
Goshia [24]

Answer - > Inter-Governmental Organizations or (IGO's)

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which branch of the federal has the power to appoint federal judges?
user100 [1]

Answer:

The correct answer is Executive Branch .

Explanation:

The executive branch is made up of the president, vice president, and his entire cabinet. For the appointment of a federal judge, the appointment of the President and an approval of the Senate are required considering the provisions of Article 3 of the Constitution of the United States. The duration of this appointment is indefinite, unless the judge commits a crime and must be tried for it.

3 0
3 years ago
What was one major weakness of the Articles of Confederation?
zloy xaker [14]

Answer:

D. It did not give the Confederation Congress a way to raise money

by collecting taxes.

Explanation:

They made it too difficult for the government to raise money through taxes and duties. Congress had not have the power to tax. The national Congress was denied the power to tax, so it could not pay for the army and navy needed to defend the nation.

4 0
3 years ago
What is the first document that colleges review when making admissions
lyudmila [28]

Answer: Your high school transcript

6 0
3 years ago
How does the Fourth Amendment protect individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police? When are there exceptio
sammy [17]

INTERESTS PROTECTED

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures, but only those done by the government and deemed unreasonable under the law. To claim violation of Fourth Amendment as the basis for suppressing a relevant evidence, the court had long required that the claimant must prove that he himself was the victim of an invasion of privacy to have a valid standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has departed from such requirement, issue of exclusion is to be determined solely upon a resolution of the substantive question whether the claimant's Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, which in turn requires that the claimant demonstrates a justifiable expectation of privacy, which was arbitrarily violated by the government. In general, most warrantless searches of private premises are prohibited under the Fourth Amendment, unless specific exception applies. For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search. Exigent circumstances exist in situations where a situation where people are in imminent danger, where evidence faces imminent destruction, or prior to a suspect's imminent escape. On the other hand, warrantless search and seizure of properties are not illegal, if the objects being searched are in plain view. Further, warrantless seizure of abandoned property, or of properties on an open field do not violate Fourth Amendment, because it is considered that having expectation of privacy right to an abandoned property or to properties on an open field is not reasonable. However, in some states, there are some exception to this limitation, where some state authorities have granted protection to open fields. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but states cannot allow conducts that violate the Fourth Amendment. Where there was a violation of one’s fourth amendment rights by federal officials, A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages, resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. Under the Bivens action, the claimant needs to prove that there has been a constitutional violation of the fourth amendment rights by federal officials acting under the color of law. However, the protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Is it indictable or hybrid Simons goes to a supermarket to buy meat for dinner. He replaces a $6.99 price
    14·1 answer
  • The ancient remains of several human bodies have been discovered and legally need to be returned to the tribe that contains the
    7·1 answer
  • According to the constitutional court what the value of African law<br><br>​
    11·1 answer
  • Why might the government not want to give lawyers to every single person accused of any
    10·1 answer
  • What is the importance of intra-party elections to national elections​
    12·1 answer
  • Why might a social epidemiologist study the mass media?
    12·2 answers
  • Just wish me a wish..........................
    13·2 answers
  • How does Medicare for All promote equality in our health care system? Please provide evidence to support how it does.
    11·1 answer
  • Reflect on the types of evidence you expect to be found and collected from the Willow Lane crime scene, and make a list of the t
    14·1 answer
  • In the house of representatives what is the next step in the legislative process immediately after a debate is scheduled
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!