Summary

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II Wisconsin v. Federal Power Commission…

We recognize the unusual difficulties inherent in regulating the price of a commodity such as natural gas. [17] We respect the Commission's considered judgment, backed by sound and persuasive reasoning, that the individual company cost-of-service method is not a feasible or suitable one for regulating the rates of independent producers. We share the Commission's hopes that the area approach may prove to be the ultimate solution.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II Wisconsin v. Federal Power Commission…

It is true that the Commission has announced prospectively that it would not accept for filing contracts containing such clauses, [12] but it would have been quite a different matter for the Commission to have declared that past rate increases were ineffective simply because they were based on spiral provisions. The effect of a contract clause of this type, of course, is only to permit the producer to resort to the filing provisions of § 4 (d) of the Act. If the increase is challenged, the producer must still establish its lawfulness wholly apart from the terms of the contract.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature