Summary

William J. Brennan, Jr. Securities and Exchange Commission v…

Congress committed to the Commission the task of determining whether a holding company has met the burden of showing that its situation falls within the narrow exception under § 11 (b) (1) . The Clause A determination whether separation entails a loss of economies likely to cause a serious impairment of the system involves an element of prediction which necessarily calls for difficult and expert judgment. That judgment requires the assessment of many subtle and often intangible factors not easily expressed in precise or quantifiable terms. This is the very nature of economic forecasting.
Source: Wikisource

William J. Brennan, Jr. Securities and Exchange Commission v…

Although Congress was aware that some economic loss might be suffered by the parent holding company or the separated integrated utility, Congress relented only to the extent of authorizing the Commission to permit retention of an additional integrated utility if that permission might be granted under the narrow exception provided by § 11 (b) (1) . But "retention of an 'additional' integrated system is decidedly the exception," and the burden is on the holding company to satisfy the "stringent test" set by the statute.
Source: Wikisource

William J. Brennan, Jr. Securities and Exchange Commission v…

The Commission's resort to data concerning the operations of the nonaffiliated Massachusetts gas companies was a response to NEES' argument, supported by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, that the projected loss of economies from separation of the gas system would require the gas companies to seek rate increases which might seriously impair or destroy any hope of a successful operation. Natural gas in 1959 enjoyed in New England the smallest price advantage over oil of any section of the country.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature