Hainan Price Bureau And Hainan Yutai Company Comment On Administrative Punishment Of Price

Resale price maintenance is a typical form of a longitudinal monopoly agreement.The so-called resale price maintenance is the case where the manufacturer or supplier limits the price of the latter to the third person when the product is sold to the retailer.Resale price maintenance includes four scenarios:fixed resale price,minimum resale price maintenance,maximum resale price maintenance,and recommended resale price.In China,the anti-monopoly law also includes the resale price maintenance in the scope of adjustment.In the article,it is clear that the operator and the transaction are prohibited from reaching a fixed price for resale of the goods to the third person,and the monopoly agreement is limited to the lowest price of the resale of the goods to the third person.as The most common forms of monopoly agreements,resale price maintenance in clothing,jewelry,cigarettes,beer,home appliances,mobile phones,cars,oil,books,pharmaceuticals and other products are widely sold.Before and after 2013,several resale price maintenance cases handled by anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies in milk powder,automobile and high-end liquor have brought the legitimacy of this behavior into public view.In particular,the judgment of Johnson case in 2013 triggered a heated discussion.The focus of the dispute was on the relationship between the three provisions of the Anti-Monopoly Law and the regulation principle of the monopoly agreement,which focused on the relationship between the three provisions of the Anti-Monopoly Law and the regulation principle of the monopoly agreement.And then Maotai,The case of the five-grain solution and the case of the milk powder are also related to the explanation and application of the two provisions,which are of great concern,and the key fact is that the reasonable principle of the illegal determination of the resale price and the principle of the violation of the law have a large theoretical divergence.As a hot issue in the field of anti-monopoly,it is necessary to probe into the problem.This paper analyzes the administrative penalty dispute between Hainan Price Bureau and Hainan Yutai Company,and combines the judgment results of "Johnson's case" and "Gree Air conditioning case" to determine and exclude the illegal confirmation of resale price maintenance agreement.The identification standards of limiting competition are discussed in depth.As to the illegaldetermination of resale price,the reasonable principle involved in the theory and its own illegal principle have their own supporting reasons.This paper points out that the agreement concerning resale price maintenance should be determined by the principle of reasonableness.On the issue of determining the criteria for excluding and limiting competition,the distribution of the burden of proof should be reasonably determined according to the nature of the case.At the same time from the market share,market competition,industry pricing and other aspects of specific analysis and identification.