Judicial Function of the Aim on Anti-monopoly Law

SONG Ya-hui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16231/j.cnki.jhpc.2008.05.040

2008-01-01

Abstract:China's Anti-monopoly Law prescribes its aim in article one;but there are also different opinions about the meaning and its function.The tip point is that whether the goal of antimonopoly law is competitive mechanism or other benefits and values and the relationship between them in article one.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Model of "Structure—Function" on the Aim of Anti-monopoly Law——Review of the First Article of China's Antimonopoly Law

SONG Ya-hui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-6021.2008.03.004

2008-01-01

Abstract:The aim of antimonopoly law is an argumentative issue in the area of economic law.This disagreement in theory leads to the diversity of the courts' judging standards in the antitrust cases,hence the different decisions.There are also different opinions on Article One of China's Antimonopoly Law which has passed August 30,2007.The Key point is that whether the goal of antimonopoly law is competitive mechanism or other benefits and values and the relationship between them in Article One.After China's Antimonopoly Law has passed,it is desirable for us to study the issue.
Antitrust control of mergers and acquisitions: a case study of China

kevin x li,pizhao che,ming du

2005-01-01

Abstract:The formulation of a functional competition law and policy, especially a workable antitrust control mechanism for merger and acquisitions (‘‘M&As’’), in transitional economies is a daunting endeavour. Various economic, political, and legal constraints peculiar to emerging economies tend to impose the substantial risk that competition policy will be abused. Nevertheless, previously almost the exclusive province of Western antitrust agencies, control of mergers is emerging as an important element of systems of competition in transitional economies. Business managers are discovering that executing a specific transaction may elicit notification of a review not only by competition agencies in jurisdictions with mature antitrust laws such as European Union and the United States, but also in
Values of Anti-monopoly Law

CHEN Xiang-ming

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-7109.2012.02.005

2012-01-01

Abstract:Anti-monopoly law is the law and regulation related to the evaluation,prevention and stopping of monopoly.It should not only reflect the basic value of social order,i.e.,freedom and justice,but also needs to combine domestic economic environment so as to stress its central value.Anti-monopoly law in China has two values.First,protecting equal rights for competition participants is the basic value for safeguarding freedom competition and improving economic benefits.Second,taking the protection of consumer rights as the ultimate value of anti-monopoly law is the fundamental objective of the value of the law.Only when the law meets the requirements of the people can it be worthwhile.Meanwhile,in order to make anti-monopoly law as "economic constitution",we need to establish a complete anti-monopoly system.And the matching regulation system should give concrete judicial guarantee for market competitors and consumers with the two values.
The Basic Modification Direction of The Administrative Procedure Law——Discussing Article 1 of The Administrative Procedure Law

Zhang Jian-sheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19563/j.cnki.sdzs.2012.01.008

2012-01-01

Abstract:The Article 1 of The Administrative Procedure Law,as the"soul article"of its legislative purpose,is a barricade when involving modification of The Administrative Procedure Law.The understanding of Article 1 of The Administrative Procedure Law mainly includes the following three different views as claim of protecting rights,claim of maintaining supervision and equilibrium theory.Based on the analysis of these three kinds of views,right relief should be the legislative purpose of administrative lawsuit.So,the modification of The Administrative Procedure Law should abide by the principles such as effectiveness,rights protection and non-loophole rights protection.
Professional Associations on the View of the Anti-monopoly Law

HOU Xue-mei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-3541.2008.04.036

2008-01-01

Abstract:Professional Associations have a natural anti-competitive tendencies because of its purpose to fully safeguard the common interests of the industry,and therefore been regulated by China's anti-monopoly law.The monopolistic behavior of Professional associations have both economic monopoly and administrative monopoly.At the same time,Professional associations plays an irreplaceable value in safeguarding legitimate competition.Defining standards to distincting the legitimate autonomy and monopolistic practices is an important issue to be resolved in the implementation of the anti-monopoly law.Related supporting laws and regulations must be formulated.
Administrative Monopoly and the Anti-Monopoly Law: an examination of the debate in China

Gordon Y. M. Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10670560802576026

IF: 3.126

2009-03-01

Journal of Contemporary China

Abstract:After more than a decade of preparation, China finally passed the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) on 30 August 2007. This paper examines the debate over whether or not administrative monopoly should be included in the ambit of the AML, which took place throughout the drafting process of this new law. Administrative monopoly refers to the abusive use of administrative power by government agencies to engage in monopolistic activities. Owing to the administrative nature of this type of monopoly, the intent to regulate it by an economic law, such as the AML, has stirred up much controversy. Having analyzed the arguments both in support of and in opposition to the inclusion, this paper suggests the need to adopt a more comprehensive scheme in tackling administrative monopoly. Also, the enforcement mechanism of the AML will have to be strengthened in order to prevent this new law from degenerating into ‘a toothless tiger’. Furthermore, the competition law regime of China will benefit from in-depth research in overseas anti-monopoly practices. In particular, the experiences of the former socialist states in Europe should be taken into account, given that they are similarly undergoing the transition from a planned economy to a market economy.

area studies
Analysis on "three in One" Character of Anti-unfair Competition Law

Gözel Shakeri,Euan Freeman,William Frier,Michele Iodice,Benjamin Long,Orestis Georgiou,Carl Andersson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1007-9556.2006.04.004

2006-01-01

Abstract:With the development and evolution of history and system practice,three clear dimensions of anti-unfair competition law appeared.Law should also play an important role in anti-unfair competition law and we should try to find some balance among the elements.These three dimensions have their own practical function and value and form the unique features of Three in One character of anti-unfair competition law.
On the Concentration Control to Joint Venture in China

Jiang Shan,Huang Yong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16092/j.cnki.1001-618x.2012.10.016

2012-01-01

Abstract:Joint Venture can bring up efficiency-enhancing integration of economic activities,meanwhile it has the possibility to induce harm to competition.Due to this dual character,joint venture has always been an issue of concern in application of Anti-monopoly Law.Anti-monopoly regulations on joint venture mainly involves concentration control of undertakings and the regulation of monopolistic agreements,in which both EU and U.S have developed a unique set of application pattern.In Anti-monopoly Law of China,there is no specific provision targeted at the concentration control of joint ventures,which leaves room for uncertainty in practice.Thus,to form a reasonable application pattern,it is imperative to conduct an active interpretation of current provisions,focusing on enforcement model,regulating target and effect analysis,taken into consideration with experience of matured jurisdiction.
Legal Implementation Mechanism of Public and Private Cooperation Based on the Article Six of Anti-unfair Competition Law

LI You-gen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.jsufe.2010.05.003

1900-01-01

Abstract:The implementation problems of anti-monopoly law become the focus in the theoretical and practical circles after the antimonopoly law takes effect. From the current perspective of legal research, the theoretical researchers pay more attention to the private implementation. However, the material for the implementation of law against unfair competition shows that the private market subject prefers to claim through complaint and report rather than private litigation when they encounter the threat of monopoly, owing to the significant advantage of the mechanism of report and complaint over the private litigation. From the realistic point of view, the more practicable choice would be to perfect the mechanism of public and private cooperation based on complaint and report in the implementation of the antimonopoly law, which would become an example of combining the advantage of public power with the information advantage of private market subjects. Therefore, the mechanism of public and private cooperation may present the future development in the implementation of antimonopoly law in China.
Antitrust: Competition Policy for Which Opposing or Intended to Regulate Monopolies

XU Guo-Liang,CHEN Zhi-guang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-2700.2006.04.002

2006-01-01

Abstract:The notion of "antitrust but not anti-monopoly structure,or anti-monopoly behavior" has its extensively and experimentally deficiencies.It arise misunderstanding easily so that give a bad effect on antitrust legislation and practice.This has already been showed on our Antitrust Law(censorship).Antitrust is a regulation to restrain monopoly structure.It is aimed to prevent all enterprises from creating,maintaining and enhancing market power,but not punish or suppress some dominant firms.Antitrust promotes monopoly structure as well as enterprises' economic efficiency through inhibits monopoly structure.
The Regulation to Industrial Association in China's "antimonopoly Law"

Jie-min SHENG,Hai-tao JIAO

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-5831.2008.04.018

2008-01-01

Abstract:As the industrial association's conduct has the possibility of restricting competition,the antimonopoly law in most countries is inclined to regulate such conducts by the way of additional standard or interpretation of the term,and take the principle of essence is more important than outward form.As to the concrete measures,in addition to setting the legal limits to the industrial association's function,restricting the exercise of the right to punish the member enterprises,most countries' antimonopoly law stipulate the industrial association's conduct rules from both the substantive and procedural aspects.The provisions in China's Antimonopoly Law,to some extent,overcome the shortcomings in China's Price Law,but the correlative system is still relatively simple,and the legal liability is also insufficient.
Anti-monopoly Enforcement with Budget Maximization

Chen Zhiguang

2009-01-01

Abstract:This article focuses on negative impact of anti-monopoly regulation different from other literatures.Anti-monopoly agency has the tendency towards budget maximization on impel of the self-interest motivation which leads to excessive anti-monopoly activities and even prey on firms.Therefore,in order to make anti-monopoly agency accountable for antitrust work to public,China should control antitrust agency by taking kinds of measures such as clear definition of antitrust interests as well as competences and making anti-monopoly information public and enhancing anti-monopoly supervision.
Main Contents and Significance of the 2022 Amendment to China's Antitrust Law

Joon-ho Kim,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34267/cblj.2023.34.1.223

2023-06-30

LAW RESEARCH INSTITUTE CHUNGBUK NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Abstract:On June 24, 2022, at the 35th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 13th National People's Congress, the amendment to the Anti-monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China was passed. It was decided to go into effect on August 1st. This is the first amendment to China's Anti-monopoly Law since its implementation in 2008. A new purpose was proposed in maintaining an orderly market system. This amendment adds innovation encouragement to the legislative purpose of the Anti-monopoly Law, in line with Xi Jinping's leadership's keynote on state affairs, which has emphasized technological innovation. It is specified in this law that it is responsible. In the 2018 central organizational reorganization, the newly established State Administration for Market Regulation, the Anti-monopoly Bureau, which was in charge of anti-monopoly work that had been distributed among the Ministry of Commerce, Development and Development, and the General Administration of Industry and Trade, was separated into a vice-ministerial level organization and upgraded to the State Anti-monopoly Bureau. The amendment bans monopoly, exclusion, and competition restrictions that abuse administrative power, and strengthens the level of punishment, such as significantly increasing the level of fines and linking antitrust penalties with credit records. Clarify the criteria for screening and classifying managers to strengthen screening of managers related to the national economy and livelihood, while introducing a safe harbor rule to exclude managers from sanctions if they prove that their market share is lower than the anti-monopoly standards made with In addition, managers who provide “substantial help” in concluding and implementing monopoly agreements are also subject to sanctions. The amendment is a review of China's anti-monopoly law enforcement over the past 10 years during the deliberation of the revision of the Chinese anti-monopoly law, and can be seen as a summary of legal practice experience. This is a demand inherent in the development of China's socialist market economy, and can help meet the objective demand of the new development pattern. It is conducive to introducing Chinese anti-monopoly law supervision and strengthening anti-monopoly law enforcement, which will be scientifically and objectively conducive.
Application of Anti-monopoly Law in China' s Petroleum Sector

JIANG Shan,HUANG Yong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-2397.2011.04.08

2011-01-01

Abstract:With the implementation of its AML, China is now confronting the problem of how to apply the law to "the state-controlled industrial sectors that have a key link with national economy or national security and the sectors that monopolize certain goods or products under law."To illustrate,in the petroleum sector,to facilitate antimonopoly by condemning abuse of executive power is by no means an advisable way.Rather,we should distinguish abuse of executive power and regulation under law and establish the governing principle of coordinating government regulation and anti-monopoly law implementation, thus to facilitate application of AML to in petroleum sector at the structural and behavioral levels.
GOVERNING CHINA’S ADMINISTRATIVE MONOPOLIES UNDER THE ANTI-MONOPOLY LAW: A TEN-YEAR REVIEW (2008–2018) AND BEYOND

Zhanjiang Zhang,Baiding Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhz009

2019-01-01

Abstract:ABSTRACT An important focus of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) is “administrative monopolies”—government-imposed restraints on competition. Since adopting the AML in 2008, China gradually has strengthened its efforts to curb administrative monopolies. Despite notable reforms such as the creation of the Fair Competition Review System (FCRS), government restrictions remain a major obstacle to competition in China’s economy. The 2008 legislation narrowly defined what constitutes improper government intervention, adopted a permissive standard for determining when public restraints were legitimate, and relied heavily on internal administrative controls to correct infringements. This paper draws upon experience in China and abroad to enhance the ability of China’s competition authorities to challenge administrative monopolies. Suggested upgrades include augmenting the robustness of FCRS, introducing new tools to improve competition advocacy, bolstering the ability of competition authorities to initiate or join litigation to attack administrative monopolies, and narrowing the range of justifications that can immunize public restraints.

economics,law
Foreign‐invested companies: more risky facing up to China's anti‐monopoly law?

Li Junfeng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/17542430910959254

2009-05-15

International Journal of Law and Management

Abstract:Purpose The anti‐monopoly law (AML) of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which had undergone ten years of debate among the whole spectrum of China's society, was finally issued on August 30, 2007 and took effect on August 1, 2008. This paper seeks to assess the impact of these new laws. Design/methodology/approach Through an examination of the latest anti‐monopoly cases since the AML came into force, this paper seeks to study the goals and regulations of the AML, and attempts to foresee features of those foreign‐invested enterprises (FIEs) who are most risky under the new Law. Findings The new AML, called by some scholars a “landmark of China's economic reform” and “a great achievement of international cooperation” has given birth to mass legal subjects and far‐reaching influence to business circle both explicitly and potentially(Wang, 2008). The new Law attracts concerns from many foreign companies, especially those MNCs and tycoons having business interests in China. Many foreign commentators take the Law as a positive sign for their future investment in China, whereas complaints about the uncertainties of some outstanding issues doubtless persist. Originality/value The study provides an insight into antitrust changes in China and signals areas of concern for potential competitors
On Administrative Monopoly

ZOU Jun

2005-01-01

Abstract:We analyze the meaning and various characters of administrative monopoly, main forms and the causes of illegal Administrative Monopoly, thus we can convince ourselves of the significance of the law on administrative permission and actively put this law in force.
Thirty Years' Development of China's Anti-monopoly Law under the Yardstick of "State-Market":Toward "Autonomous-Responsive" Law

HUANG Yong,JIANG Shan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-8003.2008.03.002

2008-01-01

Abstract:The development of AML after Reform and Openning can be divided into three phases,namely market gestation,market establishment,and market consummation,in which the genesis of AML is largely attributable to the evolution of "State-Market" yardstick.The focus of the implementation of Anti-monopoly Law is differed in various phases.And the main bottleneck of implementation are the institutional absence,enforcement deficiency and system malajustment.Under the framework "Autonomous-Responsive" law with referrence to the Berkeley Perspective Classification of legal genre,the implementation of AML can have a reasonable prospect.
Necessity of Coordinating the Relationship with Public Enforcement and Private Enforcement

徐丽枝

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1007-5674.2010.05.020

2010-01-01

Abstract:The enforcement mechanism of antimonopoly law comprises public enforcement and private enforcement.Private enforcement does have advantages.Many countries choose private enforcement as the mechanism of antimonopoly law.However,the private enforcement of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is so loose that we need to elaborate it by referring to other countries' advanced experiences on competition law,coordinate the rela-tionship with private enforcement and public enforcement,so as to perfect the Antimonopoly Law of China.
Status of the Comparatively Dominant Position in Antimonopoly Law

Hai-tao JIAO

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-769X.2008.03.010

2008-01-01

Abstract:Whether the antimonopoly law regulates the comparatively dominant position depends on whether the position would restrict competition.The comparatively dominance is a dominance in a transaction.Therefore,it can not be regulated rely solely on antimonopoly law;contract law must be stressed for coordination.The antimonopoly law's regulation to the comparatively dominant position must follow a certain limit,with particular emphasis on the negative consequences that the abuse of the position must go beyond the parties in transaction,and restrict competition in the relevant market or cause damage to the interests of consumers.China's existing legal provisions about the comparatively dominant position are relatively fragmented.China's "Antimonopoly Law" only regards the comparatively dominant position as one of the factors to judge "dominant position",and does not regulate the position itself.

Judicial Function of the Aim on Anti-monopoly Law

The Model of "Structure—Function" on the Aim of Anti-monopoly Law——Review of the First Article of China's Antimonopoly Law

Antitrust control of mergers and acquisitions: a case study of China

Values of Anti-monopoly Law

The Basic Modification Direction of The Administrative Procedure Law——Discussing Article 1 of The Administrative Procedure Law

Professional Associations on the View of the Anti-monopoly Law

Administrative Monopoly and the Anti-Monopoly Law: an examination of the debate in China

Analysis on "three in One" Character of Anti-unfair Competition Law

On the Concentration Control to Joint Venture in China

Legal Implementation Mechanism of Public and Private Cooperation Based on the Article Six of Anti-unfair Competition Law

Antitrust: Competition Policy for Which Opposing or Intended to Regulate Monopolies

The Regulation to Industrial Association in China's "antimonopoly Law"

Anti-monopoly Enforcement with Budget Maximization

Main Contents and Significance of the 2022 Amendment to China's Antitrust Law

Application of Anti-monopoly Law in China' s Petroleum Sector

GOVERNING CHINA’S ADMINISTRATIVE MONOPOLIES UNDER THE ANTI-MONOPOLY LAW: A TEN-YEAR REVIEW (2008–2018) AND BEYOND

Foreign‐invested companies: more risky facing up to China's anti‐monopoly law?

On Administrative Monopoly

Thirty Years' Development of China's Anti-monopoly Law under the Yardstick of "State-Market":Toward "Autonomous-Responsive" Law

Necessity of Coordinating the Relationship with Public Enforcement and Private Enforcement

Status of the Comparatively Dominant Position in Antimonopoly Law