OAK Repository

Metadata Downloads
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorAlexandr Svetlicinii-
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-14T16:55:14Z-
dc.date.available2018-12-14T16:55:14Z-
dc.date.issued2017-03-31-
dc.identifier.issn2234-7526-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.klri.re.kr:9090/handle/2017.oak/5382-
dc.description.abstractAbstract
The growing scale of enforcement of China's Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has drawn the attention of multinational businesses, their legal counsels, and the academic community concerned with the development of this branch of law.
While much of the public discouse has evolved around the public enforcement of the AML by the administrative authorities, relatively little attention has been paid to the development of the judicial practice of private anti-monopoly litigation. The present paper is a result of the empirical case law research based on the analysis of the published court judgments guided by the judicial interpretations issued by the Supreme People's Court. The research addresses the procedural law aspects that continue to influence the development of private enforcement of the AML in China: legal standing of the plaintiff, burden and standard of proof, assessment of economic evidence, available judicial remedies, etc. The paper demonstrates how the specified procedural rules have affected the judicial practice and attempts to map the directions for further development of China's legal framework for private enforcement of the AML. The paper also contributes to the broader discussion on the reform of the private enforcement of competition law, which is currently being undertaken in the European Union and other national and regional competition law regimes worldwide.
-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisher한국법제연구원-
dc.subject.classification공정거래-
dc.titlePrivate Litigation under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: Empirical Evidence and Procedural Developments-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.citation.date2017-
dc.citation.endPage206-
dc.citation.number1-
dc.citation.publisher한국법제연구원-
dc.citation.startPage163-
dc.citation.titleKLRI Journal of Law and Legislation-
dc.citation.volume7-
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Macau, Faculty of Law-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationKLRI Journal of Law and Legislation, Vol. 7 Issue. 1 Page. 163-206, 2017-
dc.identifier.localId16022k-
dc.rights.accessRights원문무료이용-
dc.subject.keywordAnti-Monopoly Law-
dc.subject.keywordAntitrust-
dc.subject.keywordChina-
dc.subject.keywordCompetition law-
dc.subject.keywordCourts-
dc.subject.keywordPrivate litigation-
dc.subject.keywordCivil procedure-
dc.subject.keywordPrivate enforcement-
dc.subject.keywordBurden of proof-
dc.subject.keywordStandard of proof-
dc.subject.keywordDamages-
dc.title.partNameArticles-
dc.type.localKLRI Journal of Law and Legislation-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityAlexandr Svetlicinii-
dc.description.tableOfContents
Excessive Attorney Fees and the Related Issues in... [Young-Ho Kong] 1

The Role of Financial Institutions in Brazil in F... [Renata Soares Piazzon] 23

Quality Control and Management in Legislation: A ... [Timea Drinoczi] 57

Alternative Modernity as a Possible Foundation of... [Pratyush Kumar] 87

The Plant Variety Protection System: General Pres... [Camille Bugnicourt] 117

Private Litigation under China’s Anti-Monopoly La... [Alexandr Svetlicinii] 163

Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Jurisdiction over Private AML Disputes
Ⅲ. Public and Private Enforcement of Anti-Monopoly Law: "Follow-On" Actions and Independent Civil Litigation
Ⅳ. Legal Standing of the Plaintiff
Ⅴ. Burden of Proof and Standard of Proof
Ⅵ. Quantification of Damages
Ⅶ. Conclusion
-
Files in This Item:

qrcode

  • mendeley

해당 아이템을 이메일로 공유하기 원하시면 인증을 거치시기 바랍니다.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse