Legal Research Of Private Execution Of Vertical Monopoly Agreements Regulation

Implementation of the anti-monopoly law in China for five years, the Shanghai high court heard a vertical monopoly agreements lawsuit, is the first vertical monopoly agreements cases. So in this case the parties have put forward views and evidence, and the court’s legal thoughts, using the basic logic of thinking, and the understanding of the existing laws, will play a guidance role of creating sexual judgment.This paper uses all kinds of research methods and puts forward the corresponding specific suggestions, in order to further improve the private enforcement mechanism of our country’s vertical monopoly agreements regulation.Vertical monopoly agreements is one of the types of monopoly behavior, Due to it has confusing, liability and other features, it is not easy to be known by third parties, lead to rely solely on administrative machinery to review and punish is not efficient nor necessary. While private execution has more superiority than public execution. But because the anti-monopoly legislation in China started late, causing personal execution has not been fully appreciated. Therefore suggest China could in theory and practice study of vertical monopoly agreements regulation private execution.There is no necessary "administrative leading" program in our country anti-monopoly civil litigation law. This provision is very positive and significant, not only conforms to the current international main trend of the relationship between administrative machinery, but also learned their previous experiences and lessons of our country. The author thinks that our country should also attach importance to cohesion of the anti-monopoly administrative enforcement and civil litigation, strengthen the administrative machinery and judicial organs work together, at the same time to deal with the conflict between administrative machinery and civil lawsuit in the aspect of application, make public enforcement and private enforcement of anti-monopoly execution system for the maximum effect.Accuser qualification of vertical monopoly agreements lawsuit, is a important problem of private execution, but anti-monopoly law in our country have no provision of this. At present, China’s judicial interpretation of antitrust civil litigation plaintiff qualifications prescribed scope is quite widespread, but not to clear defects of the plaintiffs qualification. The author thinks that, admitted flaws of the plaintiffs qualification not only conforms to the trend of the international antitrust legislation, also conforms to the anti-monopoly law definition, can be good enough to the plaintiff manifest the value of antitrust law, and is beneficial to popularization and implementation of the anti-monopoly law.According to our country "antimonopoly law" regulation, vertical monopoly agreements should have the actual effect factor, the plaintiff should be proof in the civil lawsuit that the monopoly behavior conforms to the actual effect factor requirements. It is the most difficult for plaintiff. The author thinks that objective by the plaintiff proof exists to prove that vertical monopoly agreements, but do not have the effect of eliminate or restrict competition burden of proof shall be borne by the defendant, set up the system of discovery at the same time, by expanding the scope of valid evidence, perfect the system of expert evidence means of assuring the plaintiffs litigation further, promote the implementation of the anti-monopoly law.