CGS § 35-26. Restraint of trade or commerce unlawful.

Cited. 169 C. 344. Statute applies to contract entered into prior to effective date of statute if contract continues in existence thereafter. 177 C. 218. Cited. 180 C. 680; 181 C. 655, overruled, see 335 C. 174; 184 C. 285; 241 C. 24. Exclusivity provisions between newspaper and syndicators did not constitute per se violations of antitrust statutes. 261 C. 673. Section is substantially identical to federal Sherman Act, 15 USC 1, and applies to contracts, combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade or commerce. 303 C. 205. Trial court incorrectly concluded that plaintiff nonunion contractor, as an unsuccessful bidder in a municipal bidding process, did not have standing to prosecute its claim against the city where city enforced a project labor agreement in the pre-bid specifications that required the successful bidder to perform all project work with union labor. Id., 402.

An initial contract might not violate the antitrust laws at the time of its formation but arguably could become violative of those same laws when one of the contracting parties later gains unlawful dominance and control over a market as a result of a series of contracts or acquisitions. 104 CA 685.

Cited. 35 CS 136.