社会政策目标的反垄断法豁免标准  

Immunity Standards for Social Policy Objective in Antitrust Law

作　　者：焦海涛[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学博士后流动站 [2]安徽大学法学院

出　　处：《法学评论》2017年第4期124-138,共15页Law Review

基　　金：司法部国家法治与法学理论项目"我国反垄断法绿色豁免制度的建构"(14SFB30035);中国经济法学研究会学术研究项目"反垄断法上的公共利益豁免制度研究--以环保豁免为例"

摘　　要：反垄断法的实施面临多种利益冲突,包括经济目标与社会目标的冲突。现代反垄断法在追求经济效率的同时,也应兼顾环境保护和文化多样性保护等社会政策目标。豁免制度是解决利益冲突的主要手段之一。反垄断法主要通过效率抗辩与附属限制理论两条路径来解决社会政策目标的豁免问题。效率抗辩主要适用于能够直接带来经济效率或可以转化为经济效率的社会政策目标豁免;那些难以或不能转化为经济效率的社会政策目标,可以借助附属限制理论寻求豁免。反垄断法豁免制度的分析框架,由此可概括为定量分析与定性分析两种。我国反垄断法中的垄断协议豁免制度,混淆了经济性利益与非经济性利益的区分,统一适用效率抗辩的分析思路,不利于社会政策目标的实现。相比之下,经营者集中豁免制度对此作了区分,但规定的社会公共利益豁免条件又过于宽松。The enforcement of anti--monopoly law faces a variety of conflicts of interests; the exemption system is one of the main means to solve these conflicts.In the pursuit of economic efficiency, modern anti--monopoly law should also take into consideration such public policy goals as the environment, employment and cultural diversity. From the perspective of practices, public interests may be exempted in anti--monopoly law through the approach of efficiency defense or the ancillary restraint doctrine. Those public interests which directly realize efficiencies or can be translated into economic benefits may easily fall into the conditions of exemption from the approach of efficiency defense. However, most public interests have no direct re- lationship with economic efficiency. In these cases, they can only be exempted by the doctrine of ancillary restraint. In sum, the analytical framework of public interests exemption system can be summed up as quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis. Art. 15 of China＇s Anti--monopoly Law, which confuses the distinction between economic benefits and non-economic bene-fits, is not conducive to the realization of social policy goals. Art.28, by contrast, distinguishes the two kinds of benefits, but the exemption conditions it prescribed can be satisfied very easily.

关 键 词：社会政策目标 反垄断法豁免制度 效率抗辩 附属限制理论 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]