The Qualifications Of The Plaintiff In Anti-monopoly Civil Procedure

The successful implementation of antitrust law plays an important role in forming themarket competition mechanism. Currently,in the antitrust field,the implementation of antitrustlaw relies on the public enforcement agencies in our country. On the contrary, thedevelopment of antitrust civil procedure is so slowly resulting that people are not satisfiedwith this situation. The reseason is largely attributed to the relevant laws and regulations thatthey are too fuzzy. There is no doubt that the implementation of antitrust law can not beseparated from the public agencies, but the function of antitrust civil procedure can not beneglected. The antitrust civil procedure can remedy the inadequate of the publicimplementation in order to make the antitrust law play a better role in the antitrust field. To dothis, first, we should clearly know who are the right plaintiffs according to the antitrust lawand whether the consumers who withstand the final damages have the right to sue. Thequestion whether the consumers can advocate their relief rights to the court by the antitrustcivil procedure in order to stop the illegal monopoly and get the corresponding compensationis not only provided differently in the different country, but also leading to a huge controversyin the scholars. The Antitrust Law of People’s Republic of China (Antitrust Law will becalled for short in the following) and The Provisions about some legal issues formulated bythe Supreme People’s Court in the civil dispute case that resulted from the monopolisticbehaviors are regulating rules about plaintiff qualifications in the antitrust civil procedure. Inaddition, the Civil Procedure Law of People’s Republic of China (Civil Procedure Law willbe called for short in the following) regulates that the plaintiffs have to meet the conditionswhich the plaintiffs must have the direct interest with the case. All of the above-mentionedmake the consumers’plaintiff qualification more confusing resulting different scholars havedifferent opinions.For this, the first part of this essay summarizes the responding concept and theory aboutthe plaintiff qualification in the antitrust civil procedure. The second part claims thetheoretical basis of conferring the consumers’plaintiff qualification and point out thatprotecting the consumers’legal rights and interests is the antitrust law’s ultimate goal. On theone hand, it can offset the inadequate of public implementation. On the other hand, it canform certain constraints to the antitrust authorities in order to pursue the legal fairness and justice. The third part mainly introduces the responding laws and justice practice about theplaintiff qualification that regulated in America, Europe and Japan. Basing on the furtheranalysis can improve Chinese related regulations by introducing foreign advanced systems.The final part advises that the Chinese laws should admit the consumers’plaintiffsqualification in the antitrust civil procedure and break the regulations about “direct interestwith the case”on the base of introducing the legislations and judicial practice. On the honest,this is the first step that confirming the consumers could be plaintiffs. For the deep gapsbetween the consumers and the violators, it is necessary to improve the assisted systems inthese aspects, such as the burden of the proof, the litigation costs, the attorney’s fees and soon in order to make the antitrust civil procedure possible and feasible. From doing this, on theone hand, the illegal monopoly actions will be decreased and the competition order will beprotected. On the other hand, the legislative purpose about protecting the consumers’legalinterests will be achieved and the fairness and justice will be pursued.