论文部分内容阅读
从雅培民事诉讼案开始,反垄断后继诉讼逐渐进入企业和消费者的视野。后继诉讼的优势在于能够减轻原告的举证责任,提高其胜诉率。而要发挥这一特点,就需要明确反垄断行政执法机关所做出的行政决定在后继诉讼中的效力。本文通过对国外后继诉讼的比较研究以及国内行政法和民事诉讼理论与实践的研究,对行政决定的整体效力进行了论证,并对其某些特殊形式在民事诉讼中的具体适用进行了探讨,包括处罚、宽大和中止调查决定。以期平衡后继诉讼中原被告双方的力量,推动反垄断私人执行的发展。
From the case of Abbott’s Civil Litigation, antitrust succession litigation gradually entered the field of business and consumers. The advantage of subsequent litigation is that it can reduce the plaintiff’s burden of proof and increase its chance of success. To play this feature, we need to clarify the effectiveness of the administrative decisions made by the antiteric administrative and law enforcement agencies in the subsequent litigation. Through the comparative study of foreign litigation and the research of the theory and practice of domestic administrative law and civil litigation, this article argues the overall effectiveness of administrative decisions and probes into the specific application of some special forms in civil litigation. Including penalties, leniency and suspension of investigation decisions. With a view to balancing the power of the plaintiffs and defendants in the subsequent litigation and promoting the development of private execution of antitrust.