我国《反垄断法》中“其他垄断行为”的认定  

The Identification of“Other Monopoly Acts”in China,s Anti-Monopoly Law

作　　者：张素伦[1] ZHANG Sulun

机构地区：[1]郑州大学法学院

出　　处：《价格理论与实践》2023年第9期57-61,共5页Price:Theory & Practice

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“数据驱动型垄断行为法律规制研究”(18BFX189);河南省高校科技创新团队支持计划项目“数据垄断防控”(211RTSTHN012)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：我国反垄断行政执法与民事诉讼并行的二元实施体制,可能引发对《反垄断法》兜底条款中“其他垄断行为”认定的分歧。“其他垄断行为”的典型样态有排他性合作协议、忠诚折扣、平台自我优待、平台最惠待遇条款,国务院反垄断执法机构和人民法院均有权对其进行认定。“其他垄断行为”的认定,应坚持个案分析,以排除、限制竞争为标准,并由国务院反垄断执法机构和民事诉讼原告承担证明责任。在涉及“其他垄断行为”认定的后继诉讼中,人民法院一般应尊重国务院反垄断执法机构的行政处理决定;在单独诉讼中,人民法院可因反垄断行政执法程序的启动而中止诉讼或在行政执法程序未启动时移送涉嫌违法行为的线索。The dual implementation system may cause the divergence of the identification of“other monopoly acts”in the bottom clause of the Anti-Monopoly Law.The typical forms of“other monopoly acts”are the exclusive cooperation agreement,loyalty discount,platform self-treatment and most favored nation clause.Both the anti-monopoly authority of the Council State and the courts have the power to identify“other monopoly acts”.The identification of“other monopoly acts”shall adhere to case-by-case analysis,take the exclu-sion and restriction of competition as the standard,and the anti-monopoly authority of the State Council and the plaintiff in civil litigation shall bear the burden of proof.In following litigations,the court shall generally respect the decision of the anti-monopoly authority of the State Council.In direct litigations,the court may suspend proceedings due to the anti-monopoly authority initiating the investigation or transfer clues of suspected illegal behavior when the investigation has not been initiated.

关 键 词：反垄断法 其他垄断行为 行政执法 民事诉讼 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]