期刊文献+

我国消费者反垄断民事诉讼的困境与突破 被引量:2

The Dilemma andBreakthrough of Civil Action Brought by Consumers against Monopolization in China
原文传递
导出
摘要 消费者反垄断民事诉讼在当下中国有着重要的存在价值和意义。尽管反垄断法为消费者反垄断民事诉讼奠定了基础,但由于我国长期存在着对国家公权力救济的偏重,在消费者民事诉讼原告资格、损害赔偿和实施程序上都规定得不尽合理,消费者反垄断民事诉讼遭遇困境。反垄断消费者民事诉讼困境的突破,有赖于相关法律制度的协调,寄希望于明确原告资格、完善举证责任、妥善安排诉讼费用承担、完善损害赔偿制度、确立实施协助机制、健全集体诉讼制度等一系列的制度创新和完善。 It is no doubt that the civil action brought by consumers against monopolization plays an important role in current China. Although the Anti-trust Law has laid a solid foundation for the civil action, it still encounters various difficulties in practice, for China has been putting too much emphasis on the government' force for a long time. Moreover, the regulations about the consumers' plaintiff qualifications in civil action, the system of damage compensation and the procedures of implementation are not reasonable. To breakthrough the dilemma of civil action, it is necessary to coordinate related legal system, relying on series of innovations and improvements such as making plaintiff qualification clearer, improving the regulations of the burden of proof, arranging the court costs properly, developing the damage compensation system, and establishing im- plement assistance mechanism.
出处 《中国社会科学院研究生院学报》 CSSCI 北大核心 2012年第1期92-96,共5页 Journal of Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
基金 国家社科基金重点项目(08ASH009) 上海财经大学研究生创新基金资助项目(CXJJ-2010-306)阶段性成果
关键词 反垄断 消费者 民事诉讼 anti monopolization consumer civil action
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献97

共引文献179

同被引文献26

  • 1波斯纳,著.孙秋宁,译.反托拉斯法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
  • 2曾世雄.损害赔偿原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
  • 3波斯纳.正义/司法的经济学[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002..
  • 4[15]博登海默.法理学:法律哲学与法律方法[M].邓正来译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.227;330;227-329.
  • 5戴宾,兰磊.反垄断法民事救济制度比较研究[M].北京.法律出版社,2010.
  • 6CANNON W S. The adminstration' s antitrust remedies reform proposal : Its derivation and impications[J]. Anti- trust Law Journal, 1986, 55(1) : 103.
  • 7DAVIS J P, LANDE R H. Defying eonventional wisdom:The case for private antitrust enforcement [J]. Georgia Law Review, 2013, 48(1) : 8.
  • 8RANDALL J. Does de-trebling sacrifice recoverability of antitrust awards? [J]. Yale Journal on Regulation, 2006, 23(2) : 313.
  • 9Private treble damage antitrust suits : Measure of damages for destruction of all or part of a business [J]. Harvard Law Review, 1967, 80(7) : 1566.
  • 10RICHMAN B D, MURRAY C R. Rebuilding Illinois Brick: A functionalist approach to the indirect purchaser rule[J]. Southern California Law Review, 2007, 81 (1) : 90.

引证文献2

二级引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部