摘要
超市通道费是近年来我国"零供"矛盾突出的焦点问题之一。其中对涉及超市(零售商)收取通道费是否滥用相对优势地位等问题存在不同看法。相对优势地位不是市场支配地位。应注意其他国家规制滥用相对优势地位行为的背景、使用条件以及各国的差异,结合我国实际情况,对实际经济活动中存在的不同情况采取有针对性的法律规制措施。对照依赖性、相对性、社会性等构成滥用优势地位的要件,电信格式合同规定过期电话卡余额不退还条款有滥用相对优势地位损害消费者利益之嫌疑,而大部分超市通道费案件显然是企业之间利益分配而不属于滥用优势地位之情形。应尽快建立大型零售商选址等相关配套制度,充分发挥行业协会作用,建立供应商与零售商谈判磋商机制,促进市场经济稳定、发展。
In China, slotting allowances and fees have become one of the focal issues among the conflicts between the retailer and the supplier in recent years. There are different views regarding whether the charge of slotting allowances and fees by the supermarket (retailer) constitutes the abuse of comparatively dominant position. The comparatively dominant position does not mean the market power. Other countries' background, conditions and the differences should be taken into account while discussing their regulation of abuse of comparatively dominant position. Different situations of market activities in China shall be regulated based on China's reality. According to the criterion for determining the abuse of comparatively market power, namely, the dependence, the comparability, the sociality, the telecom standard contact which claim that the remaining fee in the phone card would not be reimbursed after the card expired may constitute abuse of comparatively dominant position and cause damages to the consumers. However, most cases on slotting allowances and fees are the distribution of interests between the enterprises and don't have an issue of abuse of comparatively dominant position. In order to promote the social economy's stabilization and development, the relevant legal systems such as the regulation on the large-scale retailer' site-selection shall be established as soon as possible; the Guides' function shall be exerted suffidently; the consultation mechanism between the retailer and the supplier shall be established.
出处
《上海商学院学报》
2010年第2期15-19,共5页
Business Economic Review
关键词
法律
零供关系
超市通道费
相对优势地位
law, retailer-supplier relationship, slotting allowances and fees, comparatively dominant position