论国际贸易中的“搭便车”反垄断诉讼——以中国光伏企业在美遭遇反垄断诉讼为素材  

“Free Rider” Antitrust Litigation in the International Trade Field——Based on the antitrust lawsuitsagainst PRC PV enterprises in the US

作　　者：杨锋[1] 

机构地区：[1]对外经济贸易大学

出　　处：《价格理论与实践》2016年第2期57-60,共4页Price:Theory & Practice

摘　　要：继中国光伏企业在美国遭遇＂双反＂调查并被认定为倾销之后,美国光伏企业Solyndra公司借机＂搭便车＂提起了反垄断民事赔偿诉讼。但是,反垄断中掠夺性定价中的＂低价＂与反倾销中的＂低价＂有本质的区别,两种行为在认定标准、举证要求、证明过程和标准上都有很大的区别。面对这种＂搭便车＂式诉讼,企业更加应当坚持反垄断的专业性,削弱甚至消除对方在证据方面的优势,积极有效地化解反垄断风险。After PRC PV enterprises have encountered antitrust and anti-dumping investigation and was identified as dumping in the United States,Solyndra, an American PV enterprise, took the opportunity to file an antitrust civil action for compensation as a ＂free rider＂. However, the concept of ＂low price＂ in the predatory pricing of antitrust is essentially different from that in the anti-dumping in terms of thresholds or standards, evidence requirements and proving procedure and standard. Faced with such ＂free rider＂ actions, enterprises should adhere to being professional on antitrust, and weaken or even eliminate the advantages of the opposite party in terms of evidence, so as toproactively lower the antitrust riskeffectively.

关 键 词：反垄断 掠夺性定价 反倾销 低价倾销 

分 类 号：D996.1[政治法律—经济法学]