反垄断法中的协同行为

Concerted Practice under the Antimonopoly Law

在市场行为一致的基础上依据间接证据推定"协同行为"这种垄断协议的存在对于任何司法区域而言都是一个复杂的问题。在中国,由于立法的不完善及执法经验的欠缺,时协同行为的认定应持审慎态度。市场结构及产品特性、被交流信息的特性及交流的方式、竞争者是否能够提出除"协同行为"之外的合理解释,是认定协同行为时应逐步分析的几个因素。与此同时,针对企业单方面通过信息交流进行的,而对方未接受的,从而尚未构成垄断协议的价格协同邀请,中国可以在计划起草的《反不正当价格行为规定》中予以规制。为了降低企业的守法成本,立法者可在深入了解行业市场结构、产品特点及商业惯例等方面的行业特点的基础上,制定垄断协议豁免规定。

For each jurisdiction,the existence of ＂concerted practice＂,which is some kind of monopoly agreements, indirectly based on consistent market activities is a complex issue.In China,due to its imperfect legislation and lack of law enforcement experience,a prudent attitude is recommended on concerted practice. Market structure and product characteristics,characteristics of the exchanged information and the way of information exchange,and whether the competitors in question can provide reasonable explanations of the consistent market behavior other than concerted practice are all factors which should be analyzed step by step.In the meanwhile,regarding the invitation to collude which is sent by one competitor unilaterally but not accepted by the recipient of the invitation,which therefore doesn＇t constitute a monopoly agreement,China can make it regulated in the Rules on Anti-Unfair Price Behaviors which is already on the legislation agenda.In order to reduce firms cost in complying with the law,it is suggested that Chinese legislators formulate exemption rules on monopoly agreements,based on the industry structure,product characteristics and business practice.