本文關(guān)鍵詞： 轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持 本身違法原則 合理性原則　出處：《中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持是縱向壟斷協(xié)議中比較常見(jiàn)的一種表現(xiàn)形式,其在符合一定的市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)條件下會(huì)形成縱向市場(chǎng)壟斷,擾亂了正常的市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)秩序。我國(guó)的《反壟斷法》于2008年正式生效,本法第十四條對(duì)上下游交易相對(duì)人之間達(dá)成固定轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格、限定轉(zhuǎn)售最低價(jià)格等壟斷協(xié)議或行為作出了禁止性規(guī)定。同時(shí)仿照歐盟“普遍禁止+責(zé)任(或部分)豁免”的立法模式,針對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持行為或協(xié)議的特定情形和影響效果,第十五條對(duì)此規(guī)定了有限制的豁免條件。但是,《反壟斷法》對(duì)執(zhí)法實(shí)踐中轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持的處理和適用原則沒(méi)有做出明確統(tǒng)一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),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(gè)規(guī)制原則的理論基礎(chǔ)上,并結(jié)合執(zhí)法實(shí)踐中國(guó)家發(fā)改委和人民法院關(guān)于轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格壟斷案例進(jìn)行實(shí)際分析。筆者在了解轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)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(jià)格維持的經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)影響,并借鑒美國(guó)、歐盟等國(guó)家或地區(qū)對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持的法律管理和規(guī)制模式,繼而對(duì)我國(guó)反壟斷法限定轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持行為的兩大原則的選擇和適用進(jìn)行探討和分析,探索出一條適合中國(guó)國(guó)情的中國(guó)特色的規(guī)制形式。從根本上講,反壟斷立法和執(zhí)法對(duì)于轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持協(xié)議或行為的限定、規(guī)制,根本上是基于對(duì)縱向限制價(jià)格行為對(duì)社會(huì)、經(jīng)濟(jì)、市場(chǎng)的積極性和消極性的評(píng)估。美國(guó)和歐盟作為反壟斷法的先行者,在經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治、以及社會(huì)文化的變遷中,其規(guī)制轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持行為的法律也隨之發(fā)展變動(dòng)。我國(guó)反壟斷法于2008年實(shí)施,筆者認(rèn)為,可在我國(guó)基本國(guó)情的基礎(chǔ)上,借鑒美國(guó)和歐盟的法律經(jīng)驗(yàn)并吸取其教訓(xùn),不斷修正和完善我國(guó)在規(guī)制轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持行為方面的法律法規(guī)和執(zhí)法實(shí)踐,使反壟斷法真正為“提高經(jīng)濟(jì)效率,保障消費(fèi)者福利”保駕護(hù)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(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

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

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

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

4 豐明景;;轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持的反壟斷法規(guī)制之完善[J];北京化工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年03期

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

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

7 鮑濟(jì)剛;沈雄杰;;論反壟斷法視野中的本身違法原則[J];中北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)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(guó)法案例看我國(guó)法對(duì)縱向限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)行為的規(guī)制[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)法研究;2008年00期

10 邸智源;;美國(guó)轉(zhuǎn)售價(jià)格維持的反壟斷法調(diào)整探悉[J];商場(chǎng)現(xiàn)代化;2007年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：1500920