Illinois Brick bars indirect purchaser damages while Hanover Shoe bars the pass-on defense against direct purchasers. Together they allocate the full overcharge to the direct purchaser regardless of downstream effects.
Apple v. Pepper addressed platform purchasers.
Alternative Names:
Direct Purchaser Standing|Hanover Shoe Rule
Why it Matters?
The two rules operate as a matched pair, allocating the entire overcharge to direct purchasers and preventing both duplicative recovery and defendants escaping liability through pass-on arguments, which produces a coherent federal system that state repealer statutes disrupt. Ownership and control exceptions permit indirect purchaser claims where the direct purchaser was owned or controlled by the conspirator.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
How do the two rules interact?
What exceptions exist?
