本文關(guān)鍵詞： 消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)法 消費(fèi)者公益訴訟 反壟斷司法制度 原告資格　出處：《青島大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著市場經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,政府在堅(jiān)持市場自動調(diào)節(jié)第一性的基礎(chǔ)上,不僅在市場經(jīng)濟(jì)宏觀領(lǐng)域的調(diào)控,還是微觀領(lǐng)域?qū)Ω魇袌鲋黧w的規(guī)制,對經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)域的法制建設(shè)與監(jiān)督愈發(fā)重視。各類市場法律關(guān)系主體也意識到涉及自身相關(guān)利益的立法的重要性,需要相關(guān)法律來規(guī)制一些市場主體的行為,保護(hù)自己的合法權(quán)益,《反壟斷法》即是要通過立法來限制壟斷帶來的危害,發(fā)揮市場競爭的優(yōu)勢,繁榮經(jīng)濟(jì)。但在我國電信、石化、鐵路運(yùn)輸、電力運(yùn)輸、煙草等領(lǐng)域國家由國家獨(dú)占經(jīng)營,在公用事業(yè)領(lǐng)域通過行政協(xié)議允許水務(wù)、市政、城市公交、出租車等行業(yè)在一些地區(qū)進(jìn)行壟斷,我們可以看出這些行業(yè)與我們每個(gè)國民都息息相關(guān),也必然會存在各類紛爭,但由于這些行業(yè)其自身的特殊性,國家難以依據(jù)反壟斷法進(jìn)行自發(fā)的監(jiān)管,而公民自身提起訴訟的成本相對于糾紛本身所代表的利益又過于高昂。在這樣的背景下就需要一個(gè)社會組織—即消費(fèi)者協(xié)會來承擔(dān)這一社會責(zé)任,從而維護(hù)廣大消費(fèi)者權(quán)益,監(jiān)督壟斷領(lǐng)域的提供產(chǎn)品的一方市場行為,為建立有序健康的市場經(jīng)濟(jì)作出貢獻(xiàn)。然而壟斷行業(yè)提起消費(fèi)者公益訴訟,不僅需要有相應(yīng)的理論架構(gòu),還要有一整套法律程序來保證其行之有效,同時(shí)需要實(shí)際的案例去論證其可行性,這樣才可以使消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)有法可依。本文運(yùn)用了比較分析方法和實(shí)證研究的方法,在正文部分通過對壟斷行業(yè)與反壟斷法進(jìn)行經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)分析與法律分析,并且探究世界范圍內(nèi)消費(fèi)者公益訴訟的現(xiàn)狀與有關(guān)司法制度,還有對相關(guān)消費(fèi)者公益訴訟的案例進(jìn)行討論,以此來提出我國消費(fèi)者公益訴訟在壟斷領(lǐng)域中存在的問題與相關(guān)的改善措施,并且借鑒美、德、日等國家相關(guān)立法司法經(jīng)驗(yàn),來填補(bǔ)我國這方面的空白,以實(shí)現(xiàn)消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)的規(guī)范化和高效化。
[Abstract]:With the development of the market economy, on the basis of insisting on the first nature of market automatic regulation, the government not only regulates the market economy in the macro field, but also regulates the market subjects in the micro field. More and more attention is paid to the legal construction and supervision in the economic field. The subjects of various market legal relations are also aware of the importance of legislation involving their own related interests, and need relevant laws to regulate the behavior of some market subjects. To protect our legitimate rights and interests, the "Anti-monopoly Law" is to limit the harm caused by monopoly through legislation, to give full play to the advantages of market competition, and to prosper the economy. But in China, telecommunications, petrochemical, railway, and electric transport, Countries in areas such as tobacco are run exclusively by the state. In the field of public utilities, administrative agreements allow water, municipal, urban public transport, taxi and other industries to monopolize in some areas. We can see that these industries are closely related to each and every one of us, and there are bound to be disputes of all kinds. However, due to the particularity of these industries, it is difficult for the state to carry out spontaneous supervision in accordance with the anti-monopoly law. And the cost of bringing a lawsuit by citizens themselves is too high for the interests represented by the dispute itself. In this context, a social organization, that is, a consumer association, is needed to assume this social responsibility, thereby safeguarding the rights and interests of the broad masses of consumers. In order to contribute to the establishment of an orderly and healthy market economy, we should supervise the market behavior of one party providing products in the monopoly field. However, the monopoly industry not only needs a corresponding theoretical framework to institute consumer public interest litigation, There must also be a whole set of legal procedures to ensure its effectiveness, and at the same time it needs practical cases to prove its feasibility, so that consumer rights and interests can be protected in accordance with the law. In this paper, comparative analysis and empirical research methods are used. In the main part, through the economic and legal analysis of monopoly industry and anti-monopoly law, and explore the worldwide consumer public interest litigation status and related judicial system, as well as the relevant consumer public interest litigation cases are discussed. In order to put forward the problems and relevant improvement measures in the field of monopoly of consumer public interest litigation in China, and draw lessons from the relevant legislative and judicial experience of the United States, Germany, Japan and other countries, to fill the gap in this respect in our country. In order to realize the standardization and high efficiency of consumer rights and interests protection.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：青島大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.8

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 佟瑤;;消費(fèi)者公益訴訟在經(jīng)濟(jì)法領(lǐng)域適用問題分析[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì);2016年10期

2 肖建行;;消費(fèi)者公益訴訟原告資格初探[J];法制與社會;2016年01期

3 陶建國;;法國、日本損害賠償型消費(fèi)者集團(tuán)訴訟比較研究[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2015年05期

4 王莉;朱玉玲;;我國消費(fèi)者公益訴訟存在的問題與對策[J];長春理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2015年05期

5 吳光榮;趙剛;;消費(fèi)者團(tuán)體提起公益訴訟基本問題研究[J];法律適用;2015年05期

6 謝甜甜;;構(gòu)建我國消費(fèi)者公益訴訟制度[J];法學(xué)論壇;2015年02期

7 黃忠順;;論公益訴訟與私益訴訟的融合——兼論中國特色團(tuán)體訴訟制度的構(gòu)建[J];法學(xué)家;2015年01期

8 郭澤夏;;經(jīng)濟(jì)法視野下公益訴訟制度的構(gòu)建——以公益訴訟制度入《消法》為視角[J];企業(yè)改革與管理;2014年10期

9 黃河緣;;新“消法”對消費(fèi)者公益訴訟限制性適用之評析[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年03期

10 王先林;;壟斷行業(yè)監(jiān)管與反壟斷執(zhí)法之協(xié)調(diào)[J];法學(xué);2014年02期

，

本文編號：1505529