A Review Of The Presumption Of Violation Of The Vertical Price Limit Applies

Anti-monopoly law only makes principle provisions of vertical price restrictions.The current mainstream views that it should adopt the regulation way of illegal presumption,but this view is wrong because of the misinterpretation of article 14 of the anti-monopoly law and its relationship with article 13 and article 15.The reason may also be the unawareness of the seemingly simple illegal presumption,which can cause greater confusion in the law enforcement and judicial process,while the reasonable principles can form a highly efficient and convenient pedigree for analysis;the reason may be the mistaken view that there are fundamental differences in the analytical mode of monopoly agreement in Europe and America,and misunderstanding of the relevant provisions of the EU law.For vertical price restrictions,it should apply the reasonable principle,and the most important is to accumulate and search for the typical proof elements,so as to construct the analytical mode of structural rational principle,and enhance the accuracy and efficiency of the application of the anti-monopoly law.Specifically,the text is divided into the following six parts:The first part introduces the research background,research significance,research status,and research methods.The second part raises a question about the study on the application of vertical price restrictions of anti-monopoly law article 14.In the third part,in order to facilitate a more thorough review below,it is important to clarify two judgement standards—analytical mode,history and latest development trend of per se illegal/reasonable principles.In the affirmation of monopoly behavior,per se illegality is gradually abandoned,while reasonable principle gradually becomes the general principle of monopoly agreement.At present,after the exploration of long-term judicial practice,in the course of analyzing the reasonable principle of some typical monopolistic actions,we have gradually formed a relatively fixed analytical mode,which breaks through the antitrust recognition dichotomy of per se illegal and reasonable principle,and formed a pedigree of analysis under reasonable principle.In the fourth part,empirical analysis of the seven cases of vertical price restrictions in our country is carried out.The illegal presumption analysis mode adopted by administrative law enforcement departments has caused three drawbacks in practice:excessive emphasis on illegality;completely neglecting legitimacy;generalization of monopoly regulations.The fifth part reviews the argument of illegal presumption application.Review 1:the definition of monopoly agreement is set under article 13,so it cannot apply to article 14.The law clearly states that the scope of the definition is the whole law;at the same time,according to the law,since the horizontal monopolistic behavior of greater harm cannot apply to the per se illegality,not to mention the vertical price restrictions of less harm.Review 2:the application of reasonable principles to vertical price limits would result in the undermining of article 15,the exemption system.Article 14 deals with the internal balance,while article 15 deals with the external balance,which is based on the fact that article 14 has analyzed that the competitive efficacy of the act is negative and to find out the existence of an exemption,so they regulate different content.Review 3:The term "forbidden" in article 14 of anti-monopoly law and the separate enumeration of vertical price restrictions,indicating that the illegal presumption should be applied.There are only three types of law of articles that deal with behavioral patterns:it can,it should and it is forbidden.So "it is forbidden" shows that the law holds a negative attitude towards a certain act,and that the offense may require further investigation of any danger or consequences;the purpose of enumeration is sometimes only to suggest that these forms of conduct are usually in accordance with the definition of a monopoly agreement,but not necessarily;the scope of it also covered the miscellaneous provision,and the miscellaneous provision(such as the limit to the highest price,tyrants are also included)itself contains a reasonable principle of analytical mode,which may lead to contradictions.Review 4:illegal presumption can enhance the efficiency of law enforcement and justice.The seemingly simple illegal presumption can cause greater confusion in the law enforcement and judicial process,while the reasonable principles can form a highly efficient and convenient pedigree for analysis.For structural reasonable principle,it is only necessary to examine some factors that are most helpful in identifying the anti-competitive effect of certain types of behavior,so as to realize the procedural,flexible and efficient law enforcement and justice.Review 5:for illegal presumption,it is more suitable to take EU as the blueprint,and is conducive to learning.There is no fundamental difference in the analytical mode of monopoly agreement in Europe and America,which stems from some scholars' misreading on the EU anti-monopoly law.The sixth part concluded that reasonable principle should be adopted to regulate vertical price restrictions.However,reasonable principle cannot be achieved in an abstract way.By using the research results of economics and typical proof elements through accumulation,the formation of structural and templated reasonable principle analytical mode should be the development direction of anti-monopoly law in China.