Research On The Anti-monopoly Immunity System In The International Shipping Agreement Organization

Although China is one of major shipping counties with a massive developing potentialmarket, the disorder thereof has occur and the dream “seaborne power” become irrealizable,due to a lack of appropriate Shipping Law for a long time,Anti-monopoly Immunity System of the international shipping agreement organizationfirstly came into practice in America in1916with a history about100years. Since then It hasmade itself a prevalent international convention. For instance, both EU and America haverelated legislation: the former adopted “limited antitrust immunity model”, abolishing linerconferences antitrust immunity and retaining the antitrust immunity of joint and the strategicalliance while the latter a “comprehensive and overall antitrust immunity model”, grantingliner conference, negotiation agreement and operation agreement organizations collectiveimmunity. but after years of deliberation and evaluation, America is now inclined to revokeantitrust immunity conferred to the liner conference and consultation agreement organization.suffering from disorder for lack of an effective marine shipping law, China introduced itsregulations on international marine shipping market in2002, which provides the transcripts ofthe liner conference agreement, freight and operating agreements shall submitted to thetransportational authorities under the state council within15days of its conclusion. theregulations thereof have been construed as a hint that the activities of the internationalshipping agreement are allowed. But at present the Antimonopoly Law and regulations oninternational marine shipping market both failed to provide clearly grounds whether theinternational shipping agreement organization is able to enjoy the antitrust exemptions. Inlight of the abovementioned and for a purpose to boom the marine shipping market andpreserve the legal interests of the national shipping industry, it is imperative to constructshipping antitrust immunity system and perfect shipping law system suited to China’s nationalcondition. the thesis will elaborate on the issue as follows.Section One presents a detailed introduction of some important concepts with respect tothe anti-monopoly system under the international shipping agreement organization, including:monopoly, anti-monopoly, the relations between the two and the Anti-monopoly ImmunitySystem. The section then proceeds to offer a basic theoretic analysis on the formality, thecondition and the value of anti-monopoly system under the international shipping agreementorganization.Section Two firstly introduces different legislative patterns of antitrust immunity systemsunder international shipping agreement organization, including separate legislation model andindependent legislation model: The European Union and Canada are the main representativesof the former; the United States, Japan, South Korea and China are the latter. This section willalso analyzes the respective advantages and disadvantages of the two patterns combining themarket realities.Section Three, the main body of this thesis, discusses the main legal problems of theantitrust immunity systems under international shipping agreement organization highlightingthe defections of the negotiation protocol organization, operation organization in the course ofthe enforcement antitrust immunity systems. The article further goes on to explore thedifferent attitudes the European Union and the United States hold towards theabovementioned agreements, which constitutes foundations for establishing China’s Shippinganti-monopoly Immunity system.Section Four specifies how to establish China’s Shipping anti-monopoly Immunitysystem in accordance with the China’s national conditions. The author believes that Chinashould adopt optional immunity system in light of its realities and international developmenttrend by incorporating the status of the shipping industry and the challenges it confronts.