Legislation Comparison On The Misuse Of Market Power Of The Anti-monopoly Law Between China And Australia

As one of the three pillars of anti-monopoly law，misuse of market power is animportant field of antitrust law around the world."Anti-monopoly law" enacted in2008in China, the law stipulates clearly the misuse of market power behavior is oneof the main regulating behavior, and the species, legal responsibility and so on severalaspects of the regulation of this kind of behavior. Anti-monopoly law in Australia hasmore than hundred years of history, is comparatively mature related system, antitrustexperience is rich. Unlike in China, Australia’s latest "competition and consumer act2010" for the regulation of misuse of market power behavior is relatively simple. InSino-Australian bilateral economic and cultural background and so on various aspectsare closely related, Sino-Australian bilateral antitrust comparison research haspractical significance and theoretical significance.Through the legislation survey of the misuse of market power regulation inAustralia’s anti-monopoly, so we can have a comprehensive understanding of theAustralian misuse of market power regulation. After several modifications inAustralia, its theoretical basis is mainly based on economic analysis, and the valuegoal is to protect competition process. Misuse of market power in Australia consistsof three parts: abuse act, illegal intentions and has the dominant market position.Among them, the actors have illegal intention in Australia’s system is unique. In termsof form, form of misuse of market power in Australia are predatory pricing, tying,refuse to deal, etc. The legal liabilities of misuse of market power in Australia’s arecivil liability and administrative liability, criminal liability out of place in the legalresponsibility. China-Australia similarities and differences of misuse of market poweris mainly embodied in the constitution, form four aspects, legal responsibility andlegal status. Forms and legal status are main differences between the two countries.Different from Australia, in China, the actor’s illegal intent is not a essential factor; Atthe same time, market power in the status of antitrust law are far higher than Australia.The reason for the differences between China and Australia has both economic factorsand factors such as the legislative value. Reference to Australia’s regulationlegislative experience, the last of this makes some recommendations on theinsufficient of Chinese misuse of market power regulation legislation, mainlyincluding the standards of the explicit, the details of administrative responsibility, legal responsibility of criminal and misuse of market power in the core of antitrustlaw.