限定交易协议垄断违法判定的域外经验与启示  

THE FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND ENLIGHTMENT OF DETERMING THE MONOPOLY VIOLATION OF RESTRICTED TRADING AGREEMENTS

作　　者：冯婷婷 李青 FENG Ting-ting;LI Qing(School of Economics and Management,Ma’anshan University,Ma’anshan 243100,China;School of Public Management&Law,Anhui University of Technology,Ma’anshan 243000,China)

机构地区：[1]马鞍山学院经济与管理学院,安徽马鞍山243100 [2]安徽工业大学公共管理与法学院,安徽马鞍山243000

出　　处：《南阳理工学院学报》2025年第1期37-41,69,共6页Journal of Nanyang Institute of Technology

基　　金：2020年安徽省社科规划项目(AHSKQ2020D120);2024年度安徽省高校科研项目(2024AH053326)。

摘　　要：限定交易协议垄断违法判定的难点在于反竞争效果的确定与适用规范的竞合。欧盟法院适用垄断协议规范对限定交易协议垄断违法判定的重点是协议对市场封锁的相对显著贡献,滥用市场支配地位规范则主要处理忠诚折扣协议。美国法院并无规范竞合的困扰,其关注的是垄断违法判定的模式,对限制竞争效果进行个别衡量时应将所有因素列入考虑。我国未来限定交易协议垄断违法判定应统一标准,在思路上借鉴美国法院做法,判定的重点应是协议是否妨碍了竞争对手的扩张或增加了市场准入的难度。The difficulty in determining the monopoly violation of restricted trading agreements lies in the determination of the anti-competitive effect and the competition of the applicable norms.The Court of Justice of the European Union applies the norms of monopoly agreements to determine the illegality of restricted trading agreements,focusing on the relatively significant contribution of the agreement to market blockade,while the norm of abuse of market dominance mainly deals with fidelity discount agreements.The American courts are not troubled by regulatory competitive application,but focus on the mode of determining monopoly violations,and all factors should be taken into account to measure the effect of restricting competition individually.In the future,China should unify the criteria for determining the monopoly illegality of restricted trading agreements,learn from the American courts,and focus on whether the agreement hinders the expansion of competitors or increases the difficulty of market access.

关 键 词：限定交易协议 市场封锁 规范竞合 市场准入 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]