In the case of United States v. Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Navigation Co., 1949, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States government. The dispute arose when a Canadian shipping company was charged with violating American antitrust laws by fixing prices and dividing customers among themselves and other companies within their industry. The defendants argued that they were not subject to these laws as they were foreign corporations operating outside US jurisdiction. However, it was found that their actions had direct effects on US commerce which brought them under purview of American law enforcement agencies. Therefore, despite being based overseas, if a corporation's activities have substantial impact on interstate or international trade involving America then it can be held accountable for violations of its antitrust regulations.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Navigation Co., Justice Jackson disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the Harter Act and its application to this case. He argued that Congress intended to protect shippers from overreaching clauses in bills of lading imposed by carriers, not to shield them from their own negligence or misconduct. In his view, it was unreasonable for a shipper who had improperly packed goods and failed to disclose this fact to escape liability when those goods caused damage during transport due only to their improper packing. Furthermore, he contended that interpreting the Harter Act as broadly as the majority did would lead to absurd results where carriers could be held liable even if they were entirely without fault while shippers could act negligently without consequence.