Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corporation, 549 U.S. 561 (2007), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that while a term may be used more than once in a statute, an agency has the discretion to interpret each use of the term in a different way based on the context.
The concept of diseconomies of scale is the opposite of economies of scale. It occurs when economies of scale become dysfunctional for a firm. [1] In business, diseconomies of scale [2] are the features that lead to an increase in average costs as a business grows beyond a certain size.
Anti-competitive behavior is used by business and governments to lessen competition within the markets so that monopolies and dominant firms can generate supernormal profit margins and deter competitors from the market. Therefore, it is heavily regulated and punishable by law in cases where it substantially affects the market.
Economies of scale is related to and can easily be confused with the theoretical economic notion of returns to scale. Where economies of scale refer to a firm's costs, returns to scale describe the relationship between inputs and outputs in a long-run (all inputs variable) production function.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The model was first presented by Oliver Williamson in his 1968 paper "Economies as an Antitrust Defense: The welfare tradeoffs" in the American Economic Review. [2] Williamson argued that ignoring efficiencies that may result from proposed mergers in antitrust law "fail[ed] to meet the basic test of economic rationality". [3]
The $32 billion implosion that sent the second-largest crypto empire, FTX, into bankruptcy, is now also a criminal matter, after the U.S Justice Department filed fraud charges against the company ...
Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 is a UK company law case on separate legal personality and limited liability of shareholders. [1] The case also addressed long-standing issues under the English conflict of laws as to when a company would be resident in a foreign jurisdiction such that the English courts would recognise the foreign court's jurisdiction over the company.