Consumer Law Library

New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc

Volume 102 · 102 F.T.C. 1335

Citation
102 F.T.C. 1335
Docket
6235
Decision
1983-10-18
Document type
set aside order
Case type
antitrust
Statutes
FTC Act (section 5)
Industry
commodity futures trading
Outcome
set aside
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

trade association collusion

Cite this decision

New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc, 102 F.T.C. 1335 (1983). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v102-0032

Report an error in this record (decision id v102-0032)

Order status: set_aside Commission order action. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF NEW YORK COFFEE AND SUGAR EXCHANGE, INC., ET AL. VACATING ORDER IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 5 OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket 6235. Consent Order, Aprill 1955- Vacating Order, Oct. , 1983 The Federal Trade Commission has reopened this proceeding and vacated its order issued on April! , 1955(51 F. C. 859), in light ofthe Commodity Futures Trading Commission s exclusive jurisdiction over respondents' activities. ORDER VACATING CEASE AND DESIST ORDER ISSUED ON APRIL 1, 1955 On April 1, 1955, (51 F. C. 859) the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, issued the consent order in this case against the New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc. , et a!., (now known as the Coffee Sugar and Cocoa Exchange), prohibiting, among other things, the use of certain restrictive contracts for trading in coffee futures. Since enactment of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act, in 1974, 7 UB. C. 1 et seq. the Exchange s activities have come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ("CFTC"). Because the conduct covered by the Commission s order is now specifically regulated by the CFTC, the Commission has determined that it would be in the public interest to vacate its order in Docket No. 6235.

On August 1, 1983, the Commission issued an order to show cause why the order in Docket No. 6235 should not be vacated. The proposed action was accepted by the respondents.

Accordingly, It is ordered That this matter be, and it hereby is, reopened and that the order in Docket No. 6235 be vacated. Interlocutory Order 102 F.

← 102 F.T.C. 1334 · 102 F.T.C. 1336 →