The Research Of Anti-Monopoly Issues On Concerted Refusal To Deal

Concerted refusal to deal is a tool of commercial competition and a group action executed by several men to cut off commercial relationship. It is limited to one kind of behavior in this paper. In this behavior, more than two business dealers or associations, which have competitive relationship to each other, refuse to have business of good or service, or to have other commercial relationships collectively with other business dealers by means of agreement, decision or other united behaviors. What is particular about concerted refusal to deal is that the behavior adopted by rejecters to decrease business opportunities is in turn to obtain more interest.The premise to carry out the judgment of illegality is the existence of concerted refusal to deal. After the definition of basic concept , the writer studied different legal status and interest of the rejecter, the rejected and the third party in main body element, discussed two key composing factors of concerted refusal to deal in the second chapter. In the identification of behavior elements, the writer argues that there should be not only communications of ideas between rejecters, but also rejecting behavior carried out by rejecters.The essential problem of concerted refusal to deal is judgment of illegality. If the rejecters use the tool of concerted refusal to deal to supplant and strike competitors or other business dealers in order to pursuit self-competition-advantage, the market competition order could be jeopardized and thus Concerted refusal to deal should be restricted by anti-trust law. However, concerted refusal to deal could also promote market competition; therefore anti-trust law should study and judge carefully the judgment and standard of illegality of concerted refusal to deal behavior. The writer has mainly chosen anti-trust laws of American, Japan and European Union for comparative study. The legislation to restrict concerted refusal to deal is put into two categories: one is legislation represented by American and Japan, using determination of behavior illegality as standard. Legislators admit the justifiability of concerted refusal to deal and usually determine whether the behavior is illegal based on factors as market strength, destination and behavior effect of rejecters. The other legislation is represented by anti-trust law of European Union and preclusion of behavior illegality is used for standard. In this legislation mode, concerted refusal to deal is commonly prohibited, but the behavior which don't have rejecting competition property as well as those of fewer competing limitation and weaker rejection degree are exempted or adopted as exceptions. But whichever legislation is, they have employed reasonable standard for analysis of Concerted refusal to deal. So, factors, as behavior destination, rejecter market strength, behavior's effect on competition etc, in standard of reasonable analysis could be used as reference of our national legislation.The building of law should base on local economic condition and culture basis. In the reality, there exist problems such as industry association having enormous strength, regular concerted refusal to deal in commercial retailing field, strong natural trust industry rejecting phenomenon and common rejecting behavior in foreign trade in our domestic Concerted refusal to deal. In view of this, according to domestic situation and Concerted refusal to deal actuality as well as correlated regulations in domestic anti-trust law, the writer has brought forward ideas and suggestions to consummate regulation of concerted refusal to deal.