Research On The Issue Of Expert Assistants In Anti-monopoly Litigation In My Country

The refinement of the social division of labor establishes barriers in the field of knowledge.People generally focus on the knowledge in their respective fields,and they rarely learn about other fields.This is also true in the judicial field of antitrust litigation.Professional and complex economic and technical issues pose strong knowledge challenges to judges who are accustomed to relying on common sense,conscience and conventional legal skills.In order to better resolve new knowledge and new issues arising from anti-monopoly lawsuits,expert assistants have emerged to provide easy-to-understand explanations on the specific issues involved in the case,with a view to helping judges better identify facts,referee correctly.However,due to the lagging nature of the law,there are some ambiguities and problems in China's expert assistants in the judicial practice of anti-monopoly lawsuits.First,the subject qualifications of expert assistants and the experts who need any conditions can be used as expert assistants in anti-monopoly litigation? Second,what are the criteria for adopting expert opinions issued by experts? The third question is how to overcome the biased nature of the experts and to ensurethe objective neutrality of the expert opinions to the greatest extent possible in the face of the “natural bias” of expert assistants? The unclear legal rules will inevitably lead to the contending of legal theory and the inconsistency of judicial practice.With regard to the above issues,the theoretical and practical circles in China have been arguing.Therefore,it is very important to study legal theory or legal practice by studying the subject qualifications of expert assistants in anti-monopoly lawsuits,the adoption criteria of expert opinions,and the sound measures to improve the objectivity of expert opinions.This article selected three cases of "Ruibang Company v.Qiangsheng Company Monopoly Agreement","Qihu Company v.Tencent Company Abuse of Market Dominance Status",and "Yunnan Yingding Company v.Sinopec Sales Company Yunnan Petroleum Branch Company refused to resolve transaction dispute".In the first chapter of the article,the facts of the case and its judgment results are briefly described,and the related issues of the expert assistants in the case are summarized and analyzed,including the qualifications of experts,the adoption of expert testimony,and expert opinions objectivity safeguards;In Chapter 2,we borrowed relevant legislation and systems fromabroad,legally applied the subject qualifications of expert assistants in anti-monopoly lawsuits,adopted standards for expert opinion,and safeguarded the objectivity of expert opinions.The issue of measures,such as the introduction of expert helpers into the litigation,the neutral expert system,expert opinion disclosure rules,expert support personnel protection and liability rules,has been systematically and thoroughly analyzed.Finally,in the third chapter,based on the current situation of the judiciary in our country,some specific recommendations are put forward.It is concluded that in examining the qualifications of expert assistants in litigation,they should adopt professional competence standards and focus on whether they have the problem of judging real professional issues capability;In the adoption of expert opinion,whether the expert opinion meets the rules of necessity,relevance,and reliability should be considered.On the issue of safeguarding the objectivity of expert opinion,the right to initiate the procedure for the judge to introduce experts into litigation should be proposed.In this way,a system of neutral expert assistants will be established.Related supporting rules will be clearly defined in expert opinions,and rules for the protection andresponsibility of expert assistants will be perfected to better apply them in anti-monopoly litigation practices in order to improve our country's countermeasures monopoly litigation expert assistant system better.