纵向价格垄断协议的违法性认定

A Literature Review On the Development of the Microinsurance in China Vertical price monopoly agreement illegality identified

纵向价格垄断协议在实践中大量涌现,而执法机关与司法机关关于价格垄断协议违法性认定标准在个案中不尽相同。纵向价格垄断协议虽然可能影响市场自由竞争、损害消费者利益,同样可能是品牌竞争的必要途径并带来更高产品、服务质量。因此,部分纵向价格垄断协议存在合理的依据,不能一概认定其违法。对于纵向价格垄断协议的违法性认定是目前争议的焦点,价格垄断协议的违法性认定标准通常有本身违法原则与合理原则,本身违法原则具有确定性、效率高等优势,注重于法的效率价值,但一概适用本身违法原则难免损害自由市场发展,合理原则相对于本身违法原则更加注重对法的公平价值的保护,但却导致执法周期过长,且对执法者的专业素质要求较高。如何平衡适用两种原则是解决当前价格垄断协议案件处理的关键。虽然目前主流做法是适用本身违法原则判断纵向价格垄断协议,但已有法院在纵向价格垄断协议认定中适用了合理原则,这是未来对纵向价格垄断协议违法性认定的发展趋势。

The vertical price monopoly agreements in large numbers in practice, and law enforcement agencies and the judiciary on the illegal price-fixing agreement of that standard in the case is different. While vertical price monopoly agreements may affect the market to free competition, harm the interests of consumers, the same approach may be necessary brand competition and lead to higher product and service quality. Therefore, there is some vertical price monopoly agreement reasonable basis, it should not be any finds its offense. For vertical price monopoly agreement identified the illegal nature is the focus of controversy, illegal price-fixing agreement of that standard usually have per se rule and the rule of reason, the per se rule is deterministic, high efficiency advantages, focusing on the efficiency of the value of law, But Yigai applicable per se rule inevitably damage the development of the free market, the rule of reason per se rule with respect to pay more attention to the fair value method of protection, but it leads to law enforcement period is too long, and the high professional quality of law enforcement requirements. How to balance two principles applicable is the key to solving the current price-fixing agreement of cases handled. Although mainstream practice per se rule is applicable to judge vertical price monopoly agreements, but the court has found in vertical price monopoly agreements applied the rule of reason, which is the development trend of the future of vertical price monopoly agreements illegality identified.