本文關(guān)鍵詞： 轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持 本身違法原則 合理性原則　出處：《中國社會科學院研究生院》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持是縱向壟斷協(xié)議中比較常見的一種表現(xiàn)形式,其在符合一定的市場結(jié)構(gòu)條件下會形成縱向市場壟斷,擾亂了正常的市場競爭秩序。我國的《反壟斷法》于2008年正式生效,本法第十四條對上下游交易相對人之間達成固定轉(zhuǎn)售價格、限定轉(zhuǎn)售最低價格等壟斷協(xié)議或行為作出了禁止性規(guī)定。同時仿照歐盟“普遍禁止+責任(或部分)豁免”的立法模式,針對轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持行為或協(xié)議的特定情形和影響效果,第十五條對此規(guī)定了有限制的豁免條件。但是,《反壟斷法》對執(zhí)法實踐中轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的處理和適用原則沒有做出明確統(tǒng)一的標準,即適用“本身違法原則”還是“合理性原則”。本文在探討“本身違法原則”還是“合理性原則”這兩個規(guī)制原則的理論基礎上,并結(jié)合執(zhí)法實踐中國家發(fā)改委和人民法院關(guān)于轉(zhuǎn)售價格壟斷案例進行實際分析。筆者在了解轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持行為及其規(guī)制原則基本概念的前提下,結(jié)合轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的經(jīng)濟和社會影響,并借鑒美國、歐盟等國家或地區(qū)對轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的法律管理和規(guī)制模式,繼而對我國反壟斷法限定轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持行為的兩大原則的選擇和適用進行探討和分析,探索出一條適合中國國情的中國特色的規(guī)制形式。從根本上講,反壟斷立法和執(zhí)法對于轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持協(xié)議或行為的限定、規(guī)制,根本上是基于對縱向限制價格行為對社會、經(jīng)濟、市場的積極性和消極性的評估。美國和歐盟作為反壟斷法的先行者,在經(jīng)濟、政治、以及社會文化的變遷中,其規(guī)制轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持行為的法律也隨之發(fā)展變動。我國反壟斷法于2008年實施,筆者認為,可在我國基本國情的基礎上,借鑒美國和歐盟的法律經(jīng)驗并吸取其教訓,不斷修正和完善我國在規(guī)制轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持行為方面的法律法規(guī)和執(zhí)法實踐,使反壟斷法真正為“提高經(jīng)濟效率,保障消費者福利”保駕護航。
[Abstract]:Resale price maintenance is a common form of vertical monopoly agreement, which can form vertical market monopoly under certain market structure. The "Antimonopoly Law" came into effect on 2008. Article 14th of this Law has reached a fixed resale price between counterparties to upstream and downstream transactions. Monopoly agreements or acts such as fixing the minimum price for resale are prohibited. At the same time, following the European Union's legislative model of "general prohibition of liability (or partial) exemption", it aims at the specific circumstances and effects of the resale price maintenance act or agreement. However, the Anti-Monopoly Law does not provide a clear and uniform standard for the treatment and application of resale price maintenance in law enforcement practice. That is to say, the principle of "violation of the law itself" or "principle of reasonableness". This paper discusses the theoretical basis of the two principles of regulation, namely, "the principle of violation of the law itself" or "principle of reasonableness". In the light of the case of resale price monopoly in the practice of law enforcement, the State Development and Reform Commission and the people's Court have made a practical analysis. On the premise of understanding the basic concept of resale price maintenance behavior and its regulation principle, Combined with the economic and social impact of resale price maintenance, and drawing lessons from the United States, the European Union and other countries or regions on resale price maintenance of the legal management and regulation model, Then it discusses and analyzes the choice and application of the two principles of limiting resale price maintenance in China's anti-monopoly law, and explores a form of regulation with Chinese characteristics that is suitable for China's national conditions. Antitrust legislation and enforcement of restrictions on resale price maintenance agreements or behavior, regulation, is fundamentally based on vertical price restrictions on the social, economic, An assessment of market positivity and negativity. The United States and the European Union, as pioneers of anti-monopoly law, have been involved in economic, political, and sociocultural changes. The law governing the maintenance of resale price has also developed and changed. Our anti-monopoly law was put into effect in 2008. The author thinks that on the basis of the basic conditions of our country, we can learn from the legal experience of the United States and the European Union and draw lessons from it. We should revise and perfect our country's laws and regulations and law enforcement practice in regulating the maintenance of resale price constantly, so that the anti-monopoly law can really protect "improving economic efficiency and protecting consumer welfare".
【學位授予單位】：中國社會科學院研究生院
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D922.294

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王蕊;;轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的雙重效應及其規(guī)制[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(中旬);2012年08期

2 張駿;;完善轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持反壟斷法規(guī)制的路徑選擇[J];法學;2013年02期

3 楊莉萍;;從茅臺、五糧液案看最低轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的反壟斷法規(guī)制[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學院學報;2013年04期

4 豐明景;;轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的反壟斷法規(guī)制之完善[J];北京化工大學學報(社會科學版);2013年03期

5 唐要家;;轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的合謀效應與反壟斷執(zhí)法政策[J];財經(jīng)論叢;2014年01期

6 鄭鵬程;美國反壟斷法“本身違法”與“合理法則”適用范圍探討[J];河北法學;2005年10期

7 鮑濟剛;沈雄杰;;論反壟斷法視野中的本身違法原則[J];中北大學學報(社會科學版);2005年06期

8 周旭;池俊斌;;小議反壟斷法中的合理原則與本身合法原則[J];華章;2009年14期

9 胡欣立;;從美國法案例看我國法對縱向限制競爭行為的規(guī)制[J];經(jīng)濟法研究;2008年00期

10 邸智源;;美國轉(zhuǎn)售價格維持的反壟斷法調(diào)整探悉[J];商場現(xiàn)代化;2007年04期

，

本文編號：1500920