我国反垄断民事后继诉讼的现实障碍分析
Analysis of the Realistic Obstacles of Antitrust Civil Subsequent Litigation in China
摘要: 相对于反垄断民事独立诉讼,反垄断民事后继诉讼具有证明违法相对容易,举证责任较轻等相对优势,能够强化反垄断威慑。在司法实践中,由于公共执行决定效力不明确、原告难以获得公共执行资料以及高证明标准,极大地抑制了诉讼积极性,我国反垄断后继诉讼呈现出数量极少、胜诉率极低、损害赔偿象征性等特点,使得其诉讼效益完全无法达成,制度的内生价值证成无法实现。
Abstract:
In comparison with independent civil antitrust litigation, subsequent litigation of antitrust civil has relative advantages such as relatively easy to prove illegal and lighter burden of proof, which can strengthen antitrust deterrence. However, in judicial practice, the litigation is faced with the obstacles of unclear validity of public enforcement decisions, the difficulty for the plaintiff to obtain public enforcement information, and high standard of proof, which significantly inhibit the plaintiff’s enthusiasm for litigation and make China’s antitrust subsequent litigation present a minimal number, shallow success rate and symbolic damages so that the litigation benefits are completely unachievable and the endogenous value of the law system cannot be realized.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
列宁. 列宁选集[M]. 第二版, 第29卷. 北京: 人民出版社, 1987: 110.
|
|
[2]
|
王晓晔. 反垄断法[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2011: 40.
|
|
[3]
|
[美]理查德·A.波斯纳. 反托拉斯法[M]. 孙秋宁, 译. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2003: 313.
|
|
[4]
|
王健. 反垄断法的私人执行[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2008: 48.
|
|
[5]
|
戴宾. 反垄断私人诉讼制度研究[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2017: 56.
|
|
[6]
|
叶卫平. 反垄断法分析模式的中国选择[J]. 中国社会科学, 2017(3): 96-115.
|
|
[7]
|
Wouter, P.J. (2009) Wils: The Relationship between Public Antitrust Enforcement and Private Actions for Damages. World Competition, 32, 3-26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[8]
|
Graells, A.S. (2006) Dis-covery, Confidentiality and Disclosure of Evidence under the Private Enforcement of EU Antitrust Rules. IE Working Paper Derecho. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[9]
|
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Develop-ment, Relationship between Public and Private Antitrust Enforcement.
http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=DAF/COMP/WP3(2015)14&docLanguage=En
|
|
[10]
|
Easterbrook, F.H. (1981) Predatory Strategies and Counter Strategies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[11]
|
Peyer, S. (2012) Private Antitrust Litigation in Germany from 2005 to 2007. Empirical Evidence. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 8, 331-359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[12]
|
吴宏伟, 闫卫军. 论反垄断执法机构的行政决定在反垄断“跟进诉讼”程序中的效力[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2010(5): 56-60.
|
|
[13]
|
陈灿祁. 欧盟反垄断民事诉讼中的证据开示研究[J]. 湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2016, 40(2): 68-72.
|
|
[14]
|
蒋岩波, 喻玲. 我国反垄断民事诉讼制度面临的挑战及其变革[J]. 江西社会科学, 2011, 31(4): 161-166
|
|
[15]
|
邵明, 李海尧. 我国民事诉讼多元化证明标准的适用[J]. 法律适用, 2021(11): 13-24.
|
|
[16]
|
李浩. 民事诉讼证明标准的再思考[J]. 法商研究(中南政法学院学报), 1999(5): 19-21.
|
|
[17]
|
阎巍. 对我国民事诉讼证明标准的再审视[J]. 人民司法(应用), 2016(31): 90-96.
|