Competition Law/ Anti-Monopoly Law

Subscribe to Competition Law/ Anti-Monopoly Law via RSS

Authored by Michael Gu (michaelgu@anjielaw.com) and Yu Shuitian (yushuitian@anjielaw.com) at AnJie Law Firm

Two months after the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) published its last high-profile anti-monopoly penalty decisions (e.g. Japanese Auto Parts and Bearing Manufacturers case, Audi and Chrysler case), another anti-monopoly agency in China, the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) steps up in antitrust enforcement in addition to its usual merger reviews with a new round of anti-monopoly crackdown. On 2 December 2014, for the first time ever, MOFCOM, the Chinese antitrust enforcement authority responsible for merger control, published three penalty decisions regarding concentration of undertakings. MOFCOM has announced that it was going to publicize its penalty decisions on undertakings which fail to file a notifiable merger as early as 21 March 2014, and now, here it comes.

Reading more…Continue Reading MOFCOM Steps Up: Penalty Decisions Regarding Merger Control Published for the First Time

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com) and Ms. Xue Ying (xueying@anjielaw.com) at AnJie Law Firm

Dear readers,

To facilitate your understanding of the Huawei/IDC case, the AnJie lawyers have translated the reasoning of the Guangdong People’s High Court, the appellant court. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact

 Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com) and Wan Jia (wanjia@anjielaw.com) at AnJie Law Frim

Background

On April 5, 2013, the Landgericht Düsseldorf (a German regional court) referred a set of questions relating to injunctive relief over standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) to the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) in connection with a patent dispute between Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (“Huawei”) and ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH (collectively “ZTE”). This lawsuit was originally brought by Huawei in 2011, relating to an alleged infringement by ZTE of a patent owned by Huawei and declared to be essential in the LTE standard developed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”).Continue Reading Huawei vs. ZTE – The Advocate General Has Spoken

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com) & Dr. Song Ying (songying@anjielaw.com) at Anjie Law Firm

Public enforcement and private enforcement of competition law should be complementary mechanisms each other. It is witnessed a situation of “leaning to one side” in China previously, namely the public antitrust enforcement progressed more rapidly than the private enforcement system. While from 2012, a leap-forward development of China’s private AML enforcement has impressed people. This article mainly introduces the tendency and evolvement in China’s private AML enforcement, with the hope to give readers some enlightenment.Continue Reading Private AML Enforcement is Catching up its Public Counterpart

Authored by  Michael Gu (michaelgu@anjielaw.com) at AnJie Law Firm

Background

The automotive industry has undergone a new round of “antitrust crackdowns”. On 11 September 2014, Hubei Price Bureau released its decisions to impose penalties arising from a price monopoly on FAW-Volkswagen Sales Co., Ltd (“FAW-Volkswagen”) of RMB248.58 million (USD40.52) and eight Audi dealers in Hubei Province amounting to RMB29.96 million [1]. Two Audi dealers, i.e. Hubei Aoze and Wuhan Aojia, were exempted from the penalty. On the same day, Shanghai’s municipal price authority imposed a fine of RMB31.68 million (USD5.16 million) on Chrysler (China) Automotive Sales Co., Ltd (“Chrysler”) and a combined RMB2.14 million fine on its three dealers in Shanghai for price monopoly [2]. It is worth noting that this is the first time that both horizontal and vertical monopolies were found in the same case. Both FAW-Volkswagen and Chrysler reached vertical agreements with their respective dealers to restrict the resale price of the car and after-sale services. Furthermore, their respective dealers reached and implemented horizontal agreements to fix the relevant price.Continue Reading FAW-Volkswagen, Chrysler and Related Dealers Fined Nearly RMB280 Million for Monopolistic Conduct

Concurrences Competition Law Journal, in partnership with the New York University School of Law, will hold its inaugural conference "Antitrust in Emerging and Developing Countries” on Friday, October 24, 2014, at the NYU campus. This one-day conference (8:30am to 6:30pm) brings together prestigious speakers from across the world. Leading lawyers, in-house consultant, and enterprises senior managers from emerging and developing countries like China, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, among other jurisdictions will participate in the event. Continue Reading Announcement for Concurrences Journal Event on Antitrust in Developing Countries

Authored by Michael Gu (michaelgu@anjielaw.com) and Yu Shuitian at AnJie Law Firm

Introduction

On 11 September 2014, China’s three antitrust law enforcers held a joint press conference in defense of the recent antitrust probes into multinationals including Microsoft and Japanese auto parts and bearing manufacturers. Issues surrounding the probes came to light after U.S. and European trade groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the European Union Chamber of Commerce said PRC antitrust investigators were unfairly targeting foreign businesses. Director General Mr. Shang Ming of the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”), Director General Mr. Xu Kunlin of the Price Supervision and Anti-Monopoly Bureau of National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC”) and Director General Ms. Ren Airong of AntiMonopoly and Anti-unfair Competition Enforcement Bureau of State Administration for Industry and Commerce (“SAIC”) attended the press conference. They spoke on their respective Anti-Monopoly Law (“AML”) enforcement positions and answered questions. In particular, they offered updates on the status of several high-profile cases, responded to criticism on selective law enforcement and lack of procedural fairness and transparency. Continue Reading Chinese Competition Authorities Hold Joint Press Conference in Response to Criticism from E.U. and U.S. Trade Groups

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com) and Dr. Annie Xue at AnJie Law Firm

China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) handed down antitrust penalties totaling 1.24 billion yuan on 12 Japanese companies in the past August, including eight auto parts makers and four bearing manufacturers. This action came after a series of global crackdown on auto parts price cartels taking place in the U.S., the EU, Japan and Singapore, while reinforcing the trend of the Chinese antitrust authorities following their counterparts in other major antitrust regimes, especially the U.S. and the EU. Continue Reading China’s Follow-on Public Antitrust Enforcement Intensifies

Authored by Michael Gu (michaelgu@anjielaw.com) and Shuitian Yu at AnJie Law Firm

Introduction

Less than 2 weeks after the record fine (USD 200 million) in the Japanese Auto Parts and Bearing Manufacturers case that shocked the auto parts industry [1], on 2 September 2014, the Chinese price monopoly regulator, NDRC released its decisions [2] to impose combined fines of RMB 110 million (USD 17.89 million) on 23 property insurance companies and a local trade association in Zhejiang province for their price fixing in relation to car insurance. Among the companies involved in the case, one company is fully exempted and two other are granted significant reduction of the fines. Investigations into the Zhejiang branches of other nine insurance companies were terminated because those nine companies had not fixed prices or reached monopoly agreements.Continue Reading Better Late Than Never: NDRC Publishes Full Decisions on Zhejiang Car Insurance Cartel Case – Analysis of NDRC’s Antitrust Law Enforcement Approach

Authored by Michael Gu (michaelgu@anjielaw.com) at AnJie Law Firm

Within six years of implementation of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, the China’s law enforcement agency responsible for supervising price monopoly, the National Development and Reform Commission ("NDRC"), continues to strengthen its law enforcement efforts with rounds of “antitrust storm” that swept across a number of industries and companies along with record fines. This is especially true since 2013, the NDRC has probed into number of high-profile penalty cases, including the LCD Panel case [1], Moutai and Wuliangye case [2], Baby Formula case [3], Shanghai Gold Jewelers case [4] and Spectacle Lenses case [5]. Meanwhile, the NDRC has also launched investigation into the US high-tech giants, InterDigital and Qualcomm. For InterDigital case, the investigation has been suspended [6]. As for Qualcomm case [7], Qualcomm has manifested their willingness to cooperate with the NDRC in its investigation and has submitted relevant commitment.Continue Reading Note of Caution: Record Fines on 12 Japnese Auto Parts and Bearing Manufactures – Analysis of the NDRC’s Penalty Decision and Countermeasures of Companies