The Anti-monopoly Regulation System That Limits The Lowest Resale Price

As the economic constitution,the core value of antitrust law is to safeguard market competition and achieve social efficiency as a whole.Monopoly agreements are the most common means of excluding and restricting competition.Therefore,the recognition of a monopoly agreement restricting the minimum resale price has become the most important In addition,the parties to the agreement have the qualifications of the plaintiff.The rules of agreement of the agreement will determine the distribution of the burden of proof.The plaintiffs claim that the compensation for damages is different in appearance and voice.In the trial of Rui Bang v.Johnson,it highlights our antitrust restrictions on the minimum resale price behavior of the deficiencies,the existing legal provisions have a certain degree of ambiguity,and the lack of unity of the internal logic,but the case is still in our country Monopoly trial development in a landmark,which broke the plaintiff antitrust plaintiffs "zero" situation,for our in-depth study and study of anti-monopoly law provides a good perspective.This article takes the focus of the dispute as a clue.After introducing the research background and status of the paper and giving a preliminary description of the actual situation in China,it focuses on analyzing whether the exclusion or restriction of competition is a constituent element of a vertical monopoly agreement and how to identify it.Exclude and restrict competition." It is believed that excluding or restricting competition is not a constitutive element.This means that the existence of a vertical monopoly agreement is illegal.It essentially means that the application of the law violates the law itself to determine the vertical monopoly agreement;and that the exclusion or restriction of competition is the constituent element of the vertical price monopoly agreement,which means that the plaintiff is required.It can be proved that the agreement involved in the case excludes or restricts competition.In essence,it agrees to apply the reasonable principle to determine the vertical monopoly agreement.Then it expounds the connection between the distribution of burden of proof and the principle of recognition,and compares the original defendant's burden of proof under the three identified principles.Finally,it puts forward sound suggestions for limiting the minimum resale price and relevant systems in China's anti-monopoly law.