The Chinese Supreme Court recognises the dual effects of vertical restraints so the courts need to consider competitive and anti-competitive influences of a vertical restraint when judging on its legality (Hainan Yutai Technology Feed / Hainan Provincial Price Bureau)

For a long time, Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law Enforcement Agencies (AMEA) and the judicial branch have been applying different standards when reviewing vertical agreements. Chinese AMEA persists that vertical agreements are per se illegal. Once such an agreement presents external elements provided in the Article 14 of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML), it is illegal without further competitive analysis. However, Chinese courts have had recognized the dual effects of vertical agreements. Therefore, a court will consider competitive and anti-competitive influences of a vertical restraint when judging on its legality. On 18th December 2018, the Supreme Court of China responded to such a discrepancy in Hainan Yutai Technology Feed Ltd. v. Hainan Provincial Price Bureau in an intermediary way. The

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Global Law Office (Beijing)

Quotation

Jiang Wan, The Chinese Supreme Court recognises the dual effects of vertical restraints so the courts need to consider competitive and anti-competitive influences of a vertical restraint when judging on its legality (Hainan Yutai Technology Feed / Hainan Provincial Price Bureau), 18 December 2018, e-Competitions December 2018, Art. N° 91444

Visites 54

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues