论转售价格维持的反垄断法规制被引量：7

The Anti-monopoly Law Regulation on Maintenance of Resale Prices

导出

摘要当今反垄断法在考察转售价格维持时,应适用合理规则,而不是本身违法规则。这主要分为两个步骤:首先,考察转售价格维持的负面效果,如果没有这类效果,则直接推定不予禁止;然后,再对有此效果的行为进行效率考察,如果该行为产生的效率能弥补其负面效果,则也不受禁止,反之则应禁止。2013年我国发展改革委员会和上海市高等法院处理的三个转售价格维持案件,均没有完整准确地把握这一方法,这将不利于我国反垄断法的实践。基于反垄断执法的现实需要,我国今后应结合国外成熟经验和本土实际情况,尽早摸索出可行的规制路径。 The examination of the maintenance of resale prices on the anti-monopoly lawshould apply the rule of reason, rather than the per se rule at present. This is mainly divided into two steps, the first step is to examine the negative effect of the maintenance of resale prices, and if it has not such effect, it should presume that the maintenance of resale prices would not be pro- hibited directly; the second step is to examine whether it will bring efficiency if the maintenance of resale prices has such effect, and if this efficiency could compensate for the negative effect of the maintenance of resale prices, it also would not be prohibited; on the contrary, it would be prohibited. The National Development and Reform Commission and Shanghai High People＇s Court have processed three cases about the maintenance of resale prices in 2013, but they do not grasp this approach completely and accurately. It does not benefit the practice of anti-monopoly law in China. Based on the practical needs of anti-monopoly＇ s enforcement, henceforth China should combine mature foreign experience with domestic actual situation and find out a workable regulatory method as soon as possible.

作者曾晶

机构地区华东政法大学经济法学院

出处《上海财经大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》 CSSCI 北大核心 2016年第2期116-128,共13页 Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics

基金上海市哲学社会科学青年项目"转售价格维持反垄断法规制方法研究"(2015EFX005)

关键词转售价格维持生产商价格卡特尔零售商价格卡特尔支配性零售商封锁手段 maintenance of resale prices producers＇price cartel retailers＇price cartel dominant retailers＇ blocking measure

分类号 F832.5 [经济管理—金融学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献45

1赖源河.《公平交易法》,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第271页.
2Dr. Miles Medical Co.v. John D Park &Sons Co., 220 U. S373(1911).
3Levine v. Central Fla. Med. Affiliates, 72 F. 3d 1538(11th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S.820, 117 S. Ct. 75(1996).
4Illinois Corporate Travel, Inc. v. American Airlines, 806 F.2d 725(7th Cir. 1986), after remand, 889F. 2d 751, 752-- 753(7th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S.919, ll0S.Ct. 1948(1990).
5Simpson v. Union Oil Co, 377 U. S. 13. 84 S. Ct. 1051(1964).
6[美]理查德·A·波斯纳.《反托拉斯法》[M].中国政法大学,2003年.第313页.
7William E. Kovacic, The Identification and Proof of Horizontal Agreements Under the Antitrust Laws, Antitrust Bull, Vol. 38.. 5--16 (1993).
8[美]欧内斯特·盖尔霍恩、威廉姆·科瓦契奇等:《反垄断法与经济学》,任勇等译,法律出版社2009年版,第214-217页.
9Richard A. Givens, Antitrust: an Economic Approach, Philadelphia: Law Journal Seminars Press, 2005, pp. 8-26.
10United States v. Colgate & Co, 250 U. S. 300, 39 S. Ct. 465(1919).