Darcy v. Allein, 77 Eng. Rep. 1260 (King's Bench, 1603) (often mis-spelled as Darcy v. Allain or Darcy v. Allen, but most widely know as The Case of Monopolies), was an early landmark case establishing that it was improper for any individual to be allowed to have a monopoly over a trade. The reasoning behind the outcome of the case - which was decided at a time before courts regularly issued written opinions - was reported by Sir Edward Coke. Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Events March 24 - Elizabeth I of England dies and is succeeded by her cousin King James VI of Scotland, uniting the crowns of Scotland and England April 28 – Funeral of Elizabeth I of England in Westminster Abbey July 17 or July 19 - Sir Walter Raleigh arrested for treason. ... A landmark decision is the outcome of a legal case (often thus referred to as a landmark case) that establishes a precedent that either substantially changes the interpretation of the law or that simply establishes new case law on a particular issue. ... In economics, a monopoly (from the Greek monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a persistent market situation where there is only one provider of a kind of product or service. ... A court is an official, public forum which a public power establishes by lawful authority to adjudicate disputes, and to dispense civil, labour, administrative and criminal justice under the law. ... Sir Edward Coke Sir Edward Coke (pronounced cook) (1 February 1552–3 September 1634) was an early English colonial entrepreneur and jurist whose writings on the English common law were the definitive legal texts for some 300 years. ...

Facts

The plaintiff, Edward Darcy, was a member of Queen Elizabeth's court who received from the queen a license to import and sell all playing cards to be marketed in the United Kingdom. This arrangement was apparently secured in part by the Queen's concern that card-playing was becoming a problem among her subjects, and that having one person control the trade would regulate the activity. When the defendant, T. Allein, sought to make and sell his own playing cards, Darcy sued to prevent this competition. A plaintiff, also known as a claimant, or a complainant is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. ... This is a disambiguation page — a navigational aid which lists other pages that might otherwise share the same title. ... Some typical modern playing cards. ... A defendant is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute. ...

Ruling

The court determined that the Queen's grant of a monopoly was invalid, for several reasons:

1. Such a monopoly prevents persons who may be skilled in a trade from practicing their trade, and therefore promotes idleness.
2. Grant of a monopoly is damages not only tradesman in that field, but everyone who wants to use the product, because the monopolist will raise the price, but will have no incentive to maintain the quality of the goods sold.
3. The Queen intended to permit this monopoly for the public good, but she must have been deceived because such a monopoly can only be used for the private gain of the monopolist.
4. It would set a dangerous precedent to allow a trade to be monopolized - particularly because the person being granted the monopoly in this case knew nothing about making cards himself, and where there was no law that permitted the creation of such a monopoly.

Significance

Darcy v. Allein was the first definitive statement by a court that monopolies are inherently harmful, and therefore contrary to law. The case has since come to be known as The Case of Monopolies, and the arguments set forth therein have served as the basis for modern antitrust and competition law. Antitrust or competition laws, legislate against trade practices that undermine competitiveness or are considered to be unfair. ...