论文部分内容阅读
反垄断法公共执行与私人执行作为反垄断法实施的两种方式,各具利弊。在各国反垄断立法中,私人执行的重要性日益凸显,尤其在美国,反垄断法私人执行发挥着主导作用。相比之下,我国《反垄断法》偏重公共执行,对于私人执行的立法则刚刚起步。最高院于2012年颁布了《关于审理因垄断行为引发的民事纠纷案件应用法律若干问题的规定》,完善了反垄断法私人执行的相关立法,但仍有诸多问题需进一步探讨明确。本文就国外反垄断法私人执行的立法现状、私人执行主体的确定以及惩罚性损害赔偿制度的引入等问题进行了分析,并结合我国实际尝试提出了几点完善建议。
Both antitrust law enforcement and private enforcement act as antitrust laws in two ways, each with its advantages and disadvantages. In the antitrust legislation of various countries, the importance of private enforcement has become increasingly prominent. Especially in the United States, private enforcement of antitrust law plays a leading role. In contrast, our country’s “Anti-Monopoly Law” emphasizes public enforcement, and the legislation on private enforcement has just started. In 2012, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the “Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases of Civil Disputes Caused by Monopolistic Activities” and perfected relevant legislation on the enforcement of antitrust laws. However, there are still many issues that need to be further explored and clarified. This article analyzes the status quo of the private enforcement of foreign antitrust laws, the determination of private executors and the introduction of punitive damages system, and puts forward some suggestions based on our actual attempts.