Definition And Regulation Of Anti-monopoly Law On The Concerted Practices Of The Price Cartels

Article13of China’s "anti-monopoly law" provisions of the trust agreement (the price cartel) has three forms (including the agreements, decisions and concerted practices), prohibits not only written agreement or decision which is easy to find, but also prohibited orally or in other concerted practices which is hidden deeper, difficult to aware of the implied. As to this secret synergistic behavior can be due legal regulation, and the Article13anti-monopoly law does not become an empty set of overhead provision, analysis and establish a recognized standard has become necessary for the definition of cooperative behavior. In2011, the new "anti-price monopoly provisions" and "anti-price monopoly administrative enforcement procedures provides the implementation details of the" anti-monopoly law,"specifies the factors to be considered in the identification of collaborative behavior, and the generality of the provisions of concerted practices identified should also consider the market structure and market changes. Collaborative behavior identified in the judicial and law enforcement practice is still not a unified, specific, practical and effective applicable standards. I believe that, to the face of frequent occurrence in recent years to the formation of cooperative behavior in cartel cases, it is necessary to learn from the advanced experience of the United States, the EC and other developed countries in the fight against price cartels, the use of legal weapons to safeguard free competition the socialist market economic order.This article tries through our existing laws and regulations on the behavior of collaborative research, combined with actual case studies, in order to be exploring the problems in China’s concerted practices formed a price cartel regulation, while comparative analysis of the United States, Russia, collaborative behavior regulation Legislative and Judicial Practice in the Taiwan Area and the European Community, sum up experience and learn on the basis of our local cases were analyzed to explore the problems of our country in collaborative acts of the legislature and the judiciary, law enforcement, make their own views.This article total includes the following six parts:First part of the Introduction. Introduced by the recent domestic media and the broad masses of people concerned about the collaborative behavior of a price cartel cases, analysis of the synergies identified in the case of acts and exist in the law enforcement problem, which leads to the correlation analysis of the text part of the collaborative.Second part of the concerted practices identified and antitrust regulation of domestic and foreign research. In this section, the author describes the experiences in specific legislative, judicial and law enforcement about concerted practices in the United States, EU, Russia and Taiwan. And summarized and learn from. Simultaneous contrast China’s current anti-monopoly law on concerted practices regulations, put forward the lack of regulation of the current anti-monopoly law on concerted practices.Third part of the overviews of concerted practices. Elements of the collaborative concept of a price cartel and concerted practices exempted occasions and elements. Through the introduction of the concept of concerted practices, analyze elements of collaborative behavior, cooperative behavior exemption occasions and interpretation of the elements of the framework to build the whole concept of concerted practices, as background, the following chapters unfolding analysis.The fourth part, the synergistic behavior of the causes and Economic Analysis. Delve into the background and reasons of the collaborative behavior, mainly from the synergistic behavior by the "Legal Regulation of history cut understanding of collaborative behavior is anti-monopoly law as a background of the object of regulation, through the simple economics analysis described collaborative behavior in the market economy to produce reasonable, and analysis of collaborative behavior in the market economy on the other operators, consumers and competition in the market itself harm. The author believes that the only History of collaborative behavior must understand in order to accurately understand the purpose of collaborative behavior regulation, and accurate understanding of the standard of proof of concerted practices.The fifth part of the proof of concerted practices and standards. The author briefly describes the concerted practices identified by the three methods, whether it is from the three elements of the path, assisted behavioral path or shared monopoly path in understanding the basis of the antitrust laws bar the use of all direct and indirect evidence that can be obtained or The presumption of conduct of the parties is whether the establishment of collaborative behavior.The sixth part, the empirical analysis for the case of the class identified by the collaborative behavior. I summed up the main points by using the above analysis, the empirical analysis on the domestic real cases, reflect the problems identified by the collaborative behavior of the China’s anti-trust legislation on the judicial and law enforcement, and specific analysis.