Analysis On The Burden Of Proof Allocation System Of Anti-monopoly Civil Action

The burden of proof allocation is an important content of Anti-monopoly Civil Action and plays an important role in the Anti-monopoly personal execution.In the anti-monopoly civil action,due to the unequal economic power and status,the plaintiff’s burden of proof is overweight,whicn leads to the less anti-monopoly civil action cases and makes the role of system cannot give full play that the system should have.In May 2012,the supreme people’s court issued “concerning the trial of monopoly caused by the regulation of application of law in civil dispute case”,through the inversion of the horizontal monopoly agreements and the presumption of public utility enterprises,the plaintiff’s burden of proof is accordingly reduced.However,by contrast analysis,the plaintiff still carries heavier burden of proof.In order to further reduce the plaintiff’s burden of proof and balance the burden of proof of parties,China should learn more mature experiences from developed areas such as the US,Japan and Europe that are good at anti-monopoly civil action.The US is the birthplace of anti-monopoly civil action,The evidence of advantage of standard and the judge discretion and so on can well balance the burden of proof on the parties;European Union has developed rapidly in recent years,whose discovery system also can effectively reduce the plaintiff’s burden of proof.The help of the fair trade commission in Japan has greatly helped the plaintiff’s proof.Combined with the actual situation in our country,the burden of proof allocation system in the future should be perfected strictly from the following aspects:First,practice the inversion in limiting the minimum resale price and monopoly of predatory pricing and other severe restrictions on competition;Second,appropriately lower the standard of proof;Third,strengthen the judge discretion in anti-monopoly civil action;Four,improve the system of the relevant evidence so that we can balance the burden of proof to guarantee the further development of anti-monopoly civil action.