File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: The Meaning of Restriction of Competition under the Monopolistic Agreements Provisions of the PRC Anti-Monopoly Law

TitleThe Meaning of Restriction of Competition under the Monopolistic Agreements Provisions of the PRC Anti-Monopoly Law
Authors
Issue Date2017
PublisherKluwer Law International. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/productinfo.php?pubcode=WOCO
Citation
World Competition: law and economics review, 2017, v. 40 n. 2, p. 323-354 How to Cite?
AbstractInternational attention on the People's Republic of China PRC Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has mostly focused on merger control and abuse of dominance. Enforcement against restrictive agreements and concerted practice seems to have been overlooked so far. This article examines how the Chinese courts and enforcement authorities have analysed restrictive agreements. Specifically, it focuses on how the courts and the authorities have applied the concept of restriction of competition in monopolistic agreement cases. With respect to horizontal cases, one largely unanswered question is whether anticompetitive effects need to be proved even in cartel cases or a proof of the mere existence of the agreement suffices. With respect to vertical cases, there remains much confusion as to the appropriate analytical framework for resale price maintenance (RPM), the per se rule or the Rule of Reason, and whether Article 14 of the AML applies to agreements beyond RPM. This article attempts to shed light on these important questions.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/243117
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 0.7
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.307
SSRN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCheng, TKH-
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-25T02:50:16Z-
dc.date.available2017-08-25T02:50:16Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationWorld Competition: law and economics review, 2017, v. 40 n. 2, p. 323-354-
dc.identifier.issn1011-4548-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/243117-
dc.description.abstractInternational attention on the People's Republic of China PRC Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has mostly focused on merger control and abuse of dominance. Enforcement against restrictive agreements and concerted practice seems to have been overlooked so far. This article examines how the Chinese courts and enforcement authorities have analysed restrictive agreements. Specifically, it focuses on how the courts and the authorities have applied the concept of restriction of competition in monopolistic agreement cases. With respect to horizontal cases, one largely unanswered question is whether anticompetitive effects need to be proved even in cartel cases or a proof of the mere existence of the agreement suffices. With respect to vertical cases, there remains much confusion as to the appropriate analytical framework for resale price maintenance (RPM), the per se rule or the Rule of Reason, and whether Article 14 of the AML applies to agreements beyond RPM. This article attempts to shed light on these important questions.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherKluwer Law International. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/productinfo.php?pubcode=WOCO-
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Competition: law and economics review-
dc.titleThe Meaning of Restriction of Competition under the Monopolistic Agreements Provisions of the PRC Anti-Monopoly Law-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailCheng, TKH: tkhcheng@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityCheng, TKH=rp01242-
dc.description.naturepostprint-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85021800294-
dc.identifier.hkuros275572-
dc.identifier.volume40-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage323-
dc.identifier.epage354-
dc.publisher.placeNetherlands-
dc.identifier.ssrn3099274-
dc.identifier.hkulrp2018/017-
dc.identifier.issnl1011-4548-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats