检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:冯博[1] FENG Bo(Law School of Tianjin University of Finance and Economics,Tianjin 300222,China)
出 处:《财经理论与实践》2018年第2期148-153,共6页The Theory and Practice of Finance and Economics
基 金:国家社会科学基金项目(15CFX047)
摘 要:近年来,我国反垄断民事诉讼案件逐渐增多,但囿于原告主体单一、法律适用混乱、赔偿数额不足等问题,反垄断民事诉讼制度难以充分实现对消费者权益的有效救济。本文以第79号指导案例为视角,建议在反垄断民事诉讼体系中引入集体诉讼机制,并构建原告拟制、律师激励、和解赔偿等具体制度,从而激励消费者维权,解决多重法律竞合,平衡双方诉讼能力,落实竞争政策的基础性地位。Over the recent years,China's anti-monopoly civil litigation cases have gradually increased,but confined to the homogeneity of the plaintiff,the chaos of the application of laws,the amount of compensation and other issues,the implementation of anti-monopoly law are often difficult to achieve the natural consumer rights of effective relief.Having No.79 case as a clue,this paper uses the class action,the lawyer incentive and the compensation system,to improve the existing antitrust civil action framework to encourage consumers to safeguard their legal rights,to solve multiple legal competition,to balance the ability of both litigation,and to implement the basic status of competition policy.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117