不正当竞争行为法律规制的体系化

The Systematization of Legal Regulation of Unfair Competition

不正当竞争行为规制涉及多部法律的适用,但不同法设定的违法标准和法律责任存在差异。只有协调好不同法间的适用关系,才能实现法律规制的体系化。可以根据法益损害的性质和类别,来确定法律适用的选择标准,做到法益保护既不遗漏也不重复。不正当竞争行为同时损害私益与公益,具有侵权与不正当竞争的二元属性,这两种属性是并存关系,需要侵权法与反不正当竞争法同时救济。反不正当竞争法与反垄断法保护同一性质、同一类别的法益,两法适用是“互斥”关系:某种行为构成垄断的,就不宜再认定为不正当竞争。反不正当竞争法可以看作是反垄断法的“兜底法”,凡损害竞争秩序但又达不到垄断程度的,可认定为不正当竞争行为。《电子商务法》第35条也间接涉及竞争问题,但其本质上不是竞争法规范,而是用于保护处于弱势地位的平台内经营者利益,所以不构成《反不正当竞争法》或《反垄断法》的特别法,与后者可以同时适用。

The regulation of unfair competition involves the application of multiple laws,each establishing distinct standards for illegality and legal responsibilities.To achieve a systematic legal framework,it is essential to harmonize the enforcement of these laws.By considering the nature,category and extent of damage to legal interests,the appropriate criteria for law application should be determined,ensuring that legal interests are safeguarded without redundancy.Unfair competition,which harms both private and public interests,is not solely a kind of tort,but also a kind of competition damage.Consequently,both tort law and anti-unfair competition law should be applied at the same time.Anti-unfair competition law and anti-monopoly law protect legal interests of the same nature and category.The application of the two laws is mutually exclusive:any act qualifying as a monopoly cannot simultaneously be classified as unfair competition.Anti-unfair competition law can be regarded as supplement to anti-monopoly law.Any act that damages the competition order but fails to qualify as monopoly can be regarded as an act of unfair competition.While Article 35 of the e-commerce law also indirectly addresses competition,it primarily serves to protect the interests of the operators of e-commerce platform rather than functioning as a competition law provision.Therefore,it does not constitute a special law under anti-unfair competition law and can be applied in conjunction with the latter.