A U.S. appeals court threw out a USD147.8 million price-fixing verdict against two Chinese companies that were accused of conspiring to raise prices and lower supply of vitamin C sold to U.S. purchasers. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said the case should not have gone to trial after China, in a “historic act,” formally advised that its laws required the vitamin C makers to violate the Sherman Act, a U.S. anti-trust law. Circuit Judge Peter Hall said the Brooklyn judge who presided over the March 2013 jury verdict should have deferred to China’s interpretation of its own laws, regardless of the country’s motives. Hall said principles of international comity, and the “stark differences” between the U.S. and Chinese legal and economic regulatory schemes, meant the judge should not have asserted jurisdiction. “Recognizing China’s strong interest in its protectionist economic policies and given the direct conflict between Chinese policy and our antitrust laws, we conclude that China’s interests outweigh whatever anti-trust enforcement interests the United States may have in this case,” Hall wrote.