Competition Law/ Anti-Monopoly Law

Subscribe to Competition Law/ Anti-Monopoly Law via RSS

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com)

The deal between United Technologies (hereinafter referred to as “UT”) and Goodrich has triggered widespread discussions and guess from both Chinese and foreign antitrust, business and economist circles. On June 15, 2012, MOFCOM finally disclosed its decision, issuing the fourteenth conditional approval on the UT/Goodrich deal on its Antitrust Bulletin.

The filing submission of this transaction can trace back as early as December 12, 2011; when MOFCOM received the notification on the contemplated concentration between UT and Goodrich. Perhaps being influenced by the Chinese New Year session, it took 56 days from the parties filed at the first time to MOFCOM officially accepted the filing (namely, clock for MOFCOM starts to tick).

Through comprehensive competitive assessment on the relevant market, consultation with relevant authorities, industry associations, main competitors, upstream and downstream market players and customers, MOFCOM found that the concentration at hand may eliminate or restrict competition in the market for “Aircraft AC Power Generation System”. In order to solve the aforesaid competition concerns, MOFCOM engaged several rounds of talks with the filing parties regarding the remedies. In the end, on June 6, 2012, the filing parties submitted a final commitment on how to resolve MOFCOM’s concerns, which was recognized by MOFCOM as sufficient to prevent potential competition concerns in “Aircraft AC Power Generation System” market; thus, the concentration was cleared in the end.Continue Reading MOFCOM Imposed Conditions on United Technologies’ Purchase of Goodrich

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com)

On May 19, 2012 MOFCOM confirmed the conditional approval of Google’s purchase of US phone maker Motorola Mobility.

On August 15, 2011 Google and Motorola Mobility signed a purchase agreement, under which Google would acquire all shares of Motorola Mobility, which would then become a wholly owned subsidiary of …

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com)

On 18th April, 2012, the case of dispute on the abuse of dominant market position filed by Qihoo 360 (NYSE: QIHU) against Tencent (HKEX: 700) was heard in the Superior People’s Court of Guangdong Province, with the claim of 150 million RMB. It should be recognized that, whether in terms of the claim amount or close involvement in people’s everyday life of the goods or services provided by the two parties, the fact that 360 vs Tencent case has aroused wide attention is not a surprise.

Parties of the Case

The Plaintiff:

Qihoo 360 Technology Co Ltd (referred to as “Qihoo 360”), is engaged in the operations of Internet services and sales of third party anti-virus software in the People’s Republic of China. It provides Internet and mobile security products in China. In January 2011, the Company had 328 million monthly active Internet security product users, representing a user penetration rate of 83.9% in China.Continue Reading 360 VS Tencent Impels the Growing up of Private Antitrust Litigation in China

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com)

On 4th May, 2012, the People’s Supreme Court issued the Regulations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in relation to Trials of Monopoly Civil Disputes arising from Monopolistic Conducts (The “Judicial Interpretation”). This new Judicial Interpretations of Anti-Monopoly Law will take effect on 1st June, 2012. As the first issued judicial interpretation on the field of Anti-Monopoly law, it began to be drafted early since 2009. On 25th April, 2011, the People’s Supreme Court of China released the Draft version of the Judicial Interpretation to solicit public comments. Based on various public opinions, the official Judicial Interpretation freshly baked is different from the Draft version in some facets to some extent.

It is a fact that since 1st August 2008, when the Anti-Monopoly Law of PRC came into force, civil monopoly dispute cases have gradually become a very important type of lawsuits of People’s Courts. According to the Supreme Court’s records, as of the end of 2011, local courts in China have accepted 61 civil actions as courts of first instance under the Anti-Monopoly Law and have closed 53 of them. However, the civil monopoly dispute cases are normally difficult and complicated for the court proceedings whether in terms of anti-competitive agreements or abuse of dominant position. legal problems in such cases usually closely intertwine with economic data and analysis. Good understanding of specific field of economy is necessary with the view to analyze monopoly dispute cases. Indeed, some provisions of the Anti-Monopoly Law are highly principled and abstract. Provisions that refer to the operation of the People’s Court are stipulated relatively simple. Therefore, the issue of the Judicial Interpretation undoubtedly has a significant influence on the practical operation of the People’s Courts.Continue Reading The First Judicial Interpretation on the Anti-monopoly Private Litigation in China

Authored by Dr. Zhan Hao (zhanhao@anjielaw.com)

A spokeswoman from the Ministry of Commerce publicly declared in the recent, that the Ministry has officially accepted the notification on Nestlé’s acquisition of Hsu Fu Chi. If the Ministry turns on the green light for this filing it could be one of the biggest foreign takeovers of a …

On 15th February of 2012, several fundamental policies for economic reform of China in 2012 have been settled down through the Executive Meeting of the State Council (hereinafter referred to as “the Meeting”). To promote the development of diverse forms of ownership, push reforms of strategic adjustment of state-owned economy and turning state-owned enterprises into standard joint-stock companies, to improve and implement the policies and measures in order to promote development of non-public ownership economy, encouraging private capital to enter the railway, municipal, financial, energy, telecommunications, education, medical and other fields. The above slogans have been highlighted in the Meeting.Continue Reading Updates in Anti-Monopoly

The Provisional Measures on Investigating and Penalizing Violation of Notification Obligations for Concentrations of undertakings (hereinafter referred to as “Provisional Measures”) was officially published on 30th December 2011 by MOFCOM and will come into effect on 1st February 2012.

Such regulation has been for a long time called on given that not just a few undertakings often choose to escape MOFCOM’s jurisdiction in the antitrust review on concentrations, which reached the threshold by AML and relevant regulations, thus, has derogated MOFCOM’s enforcement effects.

In pursuance to Article 3 of the Provisional Measures, as expected, MOFCOM is the authority concerned in investigating and penalizing concentrations that are not notified in compliance with the law, and where necessary, provincial commence departments can be commissioned to assist MOFCOM regarding its work.Continue Reading Coming out after a Long Wait

On 2nd March of 2012, MOFCOM publicized another conditional clearance on concentration in the hard disk industry, which comes three months after MOFCOM imposed similar conditions on Seagate’s acquisition of Samsung’s hard drive business. At this time, the concentration parties are Western Digital’s and Viviti Technologies, and the relevant market is defined by MOFCOM as the worldwide market for hard disk drive.Continue Reading Another Conditional Clearance on Hard Disk Industry Concentration

The Price Supervision, Inspection and Antitrust Bureau of NRDC has confirmed to the public on 2nd December 2011, that they have received applications from China Unicom and China Telecom for the suspension of probe on alleged abuse of dominant position by the parties in last month. In addition, China Telecom also submitted a proposal of rectifying and reforming to NRDC, with the expectation to be awarded a leniency treatment. The proposal of rectifying and reforming is comprised of mainly the following aspects:

First, China Telecom undertakes to expand the capacity which is connected to other backbone telecommunications operators such as China Unicom and China Tietong as soon as possible.Continue Reading China Unicom and China Telecom Submits Application for Suspension of Investigation to NRDC