Public Interest Litigation for the Enforcement of Anti-Monopoly Law in China
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The development of the public interest litigation (PIL) in the field of environmental law and consumer protection in China have been accelerating in parallel since 2012 following the amendments of the Civil Procedure Law and the issuance of the judicial interpretations by the Supreme People’s Court. While initially led by the environmental and consumer protection organizations, the PIL practice has become increasingly dominated by the people’s procuratorates acting as plaintiffs in PIL cases, first under the pilot program in designated provinces and subsequently, nation-wide. At the same time, the private enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has been lagging behind its public enforcement due to the substantial burden of proof, evidentiary difficulties and litigation costs, which dissuaded individual plaintiffs from pursuing AMLbased claims in private disputes. The recent reform of the AML authorized the procuratorates to act as plaintiffs in PIL related to anti-competitive practices prohibited under the AML. Tracing the development of the PIL practice dominated by the procuratorates, the present paper argues that the AML-based PIL in its present form is unlikely to remedy the deficiencies of the private AML enforcement, primarily due to the restricted circle of eligible plaintiffs.
Abstract
The development of the public interest litigation (PIL) in the field of environmental law and consumer protection in China have been accelerating in parallel since 2012 following the amendments of the Civil Procedure Law and the issuance of the judicial interpretations by the Supreme People’s Court. While initially led by the environmental and consumer protection organizations, the PIL practice has become increasingly dominated by the people’s procuratorates acting as plaintiffs in PIL cases, first under the pilot program in designated provinces and subsequently, nation-wide. At the same time, the private enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has been lagging behind its public enforcement due to the substantial burden of proof, evidentiary difficulties and litigation costs, which dissuaded individual plaintiffs from pursuing AMLbased claims in private disputes. The recent reform of the AML authorized the procuratorates to act as plaintiffs in PIL related to anti-competitive practices prohibited under the AML. Tracing the development of the PIL practice dominated by the procuratorates, the present paper argues that the AML-based PIL in its present form is unlikely to remedy the deficiencies of the private AML enforcement, primarily due to the restricted circle of eligible plaintiffs.
참고문헌 (35)
- Rainer Becker, "The White Paper on Damages Actions for Breach of the EC Antitrust Rules", Competition Policy Newsletter, 2, pp.4~ (2008)
- Daniel Carpenter-Gold, "Castles Made of Sand: Public-Interest Litigation and China’s New Environmental Protection Law", Harv. Envt’l. L. Rev, 39(1), pp.241~ (2015)
- "Private Antitrust Litigation in China – The Burden of Proof and Its Challenges" (2013)[URL]
- Duncan Fairgrieve, "Collective Redress in Europe: Moving Forward or Treading Water?", Int’l & Comp. L. Q, 71(2), pp.465~ (2022)
- Hualing Fu, "Public Interest Litigation in Asia" (2011), Routledge
- Germain Gaudin, "Antitrust Damages, Consumer Harm, and Consumer Collective Redress", J. Eur. Competition L. & Prac, 12(5), pp.370~ (2021)
- "2016", 9
- James H. Jeffs, "China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: The First Five Years" (2013), Wolters Kluwer
- Han Jiang, "China’s New Approach to Environmental Governance and Environmental Public Interest Litigation", Asia Pac. J. Envt’l. L, 23(1), pp.39~ (2020)
- Heng Ju, "China’s Anti-Monopoly Law and the Role of Economics in Its Enforcement", Russian J. Econ, 6(3), pp.219~ (2020)
- Žygimantas Juška, "The Effectiveness of Antitrust Collective Litigation in the European Union: A Study of the Principle of Full Compensation", Int’l Rev. Intell. Prop. & Competition L, 49(1), pp.63~ (2018)
- "Consumer rights group withdraws complaint against Baidu" (2018)[URL]
- "China consumer group accuses Baidu of snooping on users of its smartphone apps" (2018)[URL]
- "China bike-sharing firm loses lawsuit over deposits" (2018)[URL]
- "2011", 5
- "2017", 10
- "2011", 54
- "China steps up anti-monopoly regulation" (2021)[URL]
- "China to Discipline Online Platforms with Antitrust Enforcement?" (2021)[URL]
- "Courts contribute to the construction of the unified national market" (2022)[URL]
- Alexandr Svetlicinii, "Private Litigation under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: Empirical Evidence and Procedural Developments", KLRI J. L. & Leg, 7(1), pp.163~ (2017)
- "Three highlights of China’s revised competition law" (2022)[URL]
- Alexandr Svetlicinii, "Alibaba and Abuse of Dominance: Chinese Anti-Monopoly Enforcement for Online Platforms", Competition L. Insight, 21(2), pp.10~ (2022)
- "Main Developments in Competition Law and Policy 2021 – China" (2022)[URL]
- Blanka Szupera, "Towards a Harmonised Collective Redress Mechanism for the Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law", ERA Forum, 21, pp.267~ (2020)
- Wan E’Xiang, "Establishing an Environmental Public Interest Litigation System and Promoting the Building of an Ecological Civilization", Chinese L. & Govt, 43(6), pp.30~ (2010)
- Xiaoye Wang, "China’s Anti-Monopoly Law Enforcement in the Digital Economy", Antitrust Bulletin, 67(4), pp.562~ (2022)
- Alex Wang, "Environmental Courts and the Development of Environmental Public Interest Litigation in China", J. Ct. Innov, 3(1), pp.37~ (2010)
- "2010", 4
- Qian Zhang, "Empirical Analysis on Pilot Project of the Procuratorial Organs’ Institution on Public Interest Litigation in China", China Legal Science, 5(5), pp.32~ (2017)
- Xudong Zhang, "Expansion and Restriction: The Path for the Plaintiff Qualification Selection in China’s Environmental Civil Public Interest Litigation", China Legal Science, 5(3), pp.133~ (2017)
- "2006", 4
- "2016", 2
- "Watchdog sues Guangzhou shared-bike operator over refunds" (2017)[URL]
- "2019", 40