Home | Search | Help
OST by Number | OST by Order | OST by Carrier | OST by Subject | OST by Day
OIA by Carrier/Subject | OIA by Day | FAA by Number | FAA by Subject | FAA by Day
Carrier Financials | Charter Office | Answer/Reply Calendar
Updated:
OST-2007-29262 - IATA
|
International Air Transport Association September 14, 2007 Application for Approval of Agreements Composite Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference Bangkok, 16-19 July 2007 Composite Resolutions Intended Effective Date: 1 June 2008. Counsel: IATA, Douglas Lavin OST-2007-28879 May 13, 2008 Composite Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference Bangkok, 16-19 July 2007 Composite Resolutions (Memo 1409). Counsel: IATA, Douglas Lavin
June 18, 2008 Re: Response of Scandinavian Airlines System in Support of Approval of Agreements Scandinavian Airlines System respectfully requests that the Department approve and grant full antitrust immunity for both agreements promptly. In addition, SAS hereby moves for leave to file this response in support of IATA's September 14, 2007 applications. SAS was just made aware of the fact that the Department has not taken action on the applications, and grant of this motion will have no adverse effect on any party that may have an interest in the applications. The agreements concern fares solely between non-U.S. points. U.S. civil aviation authorities have recognized that the interests of sovereign nations in the terms governing air transportation between their territories far outweigh whatever interest the U.S. and its air carriers, shippers, and citizens may have in such markets. The agreements are a critical part of the efforts of lATA and its members to simplify rules for pricing air tickets to make them easier for passengers to understand. Passengers cannot begin to reap the benefits of these streamlined rules, however, until the Department approves the agreements. Counsel: Silverberg Goldman, Michael Goldman, 202-944-3305
Order 2008-9-26 Issued September 23, 2008 | Served September 26, 2008 Order Dismissing Applications and Exempting Resolutions Our review of the agreements, which include a number of fare construction resolutions, supports a judgment that they are not inconsistent with our Order. Obvious price-setting provisions are moved to regional conferences not covered by the Order, or rescinded entirely. These include numerous fare checks which produced higher fares for passengers with complicated itineraries. The other changes largely clarify existing provisions, and appear to be designed solely to facilitate interline service by establishing necessary standards for such service, a legitimate activity under the antitrust laws. As we noted in Order 2007-3-23, if the composite tariff conference develops agreements on standards of the kind that are permitted by the antitrust laws, the conference’s activity would be consistent with that order. We have decided to act on the resolutions before us by granting, sua sponte, an exemption from our condition on the Provisions requiring the tariff resolutions at issue to be filed for review and approval subject, where applicable, to previously imposed conditions. For example, the Department has conditioned IATA’s Permanent Effectiveness Resolution 001 to provide that any carrier or travel agent may depart from the provisions of any IATA fare construction rule where a different methodology would produce a lower constructed fare. The agreements do not appear to present the type of conduct we prohibited in the Order, and their provisions can operate fully subject to U.S. antitrust laws. We are not prepared to grant IATA’s Motion for stay of Order 2007-3-23. Any stay of the Order would involve a continuation of antitrust immunity that would, at best, be difficult to tailor, through conditions, precisely to the needs of individual conferences, unduly limiting their flexibility. Nor do we think that ad hoc applications for immunity for specific discussions affecting the covered markets is a fruitful way of completing reform of the composite conferences to comply with the Order. Absent unusual circumstances, we would expect reform discussions to take place without the need for antitrust immunity, and that IATA would file an application to exempt the resulting agreements from filing. By: Michael Reynolds |
|||