Verticalmonopolyagreementofcivilcases Researchon Burdenof Proof

Vertical monopoly agreements on market competition both positive and negative effects of its double-sided competition determines the vertical monopoly agreement for the regulation of horizontal monopoly agreement can not copy the method of regulation. Due to the present stage vertical monopoly agreement for the original defendant in civil proceedings the burden of proof is no specific legal provisions, in order to compensate for legislative gaps in this area, this paper combing through the body and the process of vertical monopoly agreements civil cases, and put forward a sound civil cases vertical monopoly agreement the burden of proof allocation recommendations. Specifically, the article is based on the particularity of vertical monopoly agreement, through theoretical traceability, legislative visits, three empirical affirmation consumers, operators eligible to vertical monopoly agreements plaintiff filed a civil action, and in accordance with the "Civil Law" and "Tort Liability Act," the theory and combed the plaintiff filed a predetermined vertical monopoly agreements initial burden of proof in civil litigation. Then combine Anglo-Saxon countries and Germany, Japan's legislative theory and practical experience, made our country should adopt sound principles identified vertical monopoly agreements illegal, have important implications for our vertical monopoly agreements Regulation determines the vertical monopoly agreement of civil cases to prove allocation of responsibilities. Finally, on this basis, to the principle of fairness,efficiency as the guiding principle, namely the consumer as the plaintiff, a non-vertical monopoly agreement participants as the plaintiff and the vertical monopoly agreement participants as the plaintiff's burden of proof in three cases assigned to propose ideas.Besides the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into five parts:Part I : This section describes the meaning of vertical monopoly agreements,features and impact. In the process of market competition, operators may pursue their own interests for the purpose of monopoly agreements, and vertical monopoly agreement is a monopoly agreement participants have on the relationship between upstream and downstream operators related industries;then monopoly agreements;andfinally a detailed analysis of the positive impact of vertical monopoly agreements and the negative effects.Part II: vertical monopoly agreements established civil litigation plaintiff qualification and basis. The theoretical basis for part traceability, legislative study and practice tests three angles analyzed and identified consumers, operators plaintiff qualifications vertical monopoly agreement in civil litigation cases.Part III: vertical monopoly agreements civil cases the plaintiff's initial burden of proof. This section describes the Vertical monopoly agreements require the existence of civil cases the plaintiff vertical monopoly agreements, the fact that there is no damage, and loss of monopolistic behavior between a causal relationship between the three elements of the preliminary evidence.Part IV: Regulation principles vertical monopoly agreements and demonstrate the impact of liability litigation. The first part describes the development of vertical monopoly agreements Regulation principles, namely the principle of reasonable development per se rule; then clear that our country should adopt rational principles and the rule of reason is China's current anti-monopoly law provisions the question of meaning, in line with economic development requirements, in line with international trends antitrust be demonstrated in three aspects. Finally, to clarify the principles on the basis of reasonable to exclude the effect of restricting competition in the presence and distribution of the burden of proof plays a decisive rolePart V: Suggestions for China vertical monopoly agreements burden of proof in civil cases. Under the guidance of the principles of fairness and efficiency, it is recommended when the consumer when the plaintiff, the defendant shall bear vertical monopoly agreement is not illegal burden of proof; when the non-participation of the operators monopoly agreements as the plaintiff, the defendant shall bear vertical monopoly agreement does not illegal burden of proof; when the operators involved in the monopoly agreement as the plaintiff, vertical monopoly agreements illegal burden of proof borne by the plaintiff.