论垄断协议豁免的一般条件
|
摘要
反垄断法规制对象之一的垄断协议是把双刃剑：一般情况下,垄断协议是损害市场竞争秩序的违法行为,但是,实践证明：在一定的条件下,有些垄断协议会对市场竞争秩序产生一定的积极作用。内容相似的垄断协议在不同时间、不同区域所产生的实际效果也可能有所不同。为此,如果将垄断协议均视为本身违法,则不能最大限度地体现反垄断法维护正当竞争秩序、促进经济良性发展、保护消费者权益的目的。与上相反,对于能够带来一定积极效果的垄断协议给予一定条件下的豁免是各国在经济发展过程中赋予反垄断法的又一可行功能。但是如何才能使这一功能在反垄断法的执法过程中发挥有益作用,是一个比较复杂的问题,也是本文讨论的重点。《中华人民共和国反垄断法》第十五条在特定的排除了几类可以豁免的垄断协议之后,便笼统的规定：能够得到豁免的垄断协议必须满足“经营者所达成的协议不会严重限制相关市场的竞争,并且能够使消费者分享由此产生的利益”。此处的不严重限制市场竞争应作何理解?消费者分享利益的评价标准应作何解释?都没有给出明确的衡量标准。本文借助欧盟竞争法中对“垄断协议豁免一般条件”的规定,以及欧盟的相关案例进行分析：具体阐释垄断协议在对企业的生产经营活动进行必要和最小化限制之后,并不一定会对竞争产生实质性限制,反而有可能提高生产经营效率,提升生产者、经营者、消费者、乃至全社会的整体获利水平等。文章将引用效率与效益考核、规模经济优势、市场支配力的影响、社会福利的评判等相关经济学原理,分析垄断协议豁免制度。通过借鉴、比较的方法,以期为我国反垄断法第十五条做出一个相对可行的解读。
Since competition is not always good for economy developing, and monopoly is not always bad, nowadays, the antitrust law acts as a government's tool to keep a balance between competition and monopoly.'Cartel Agreements' as one of essential and foundation issues in the antitrust law, they would follow the character of the antitrust law. Thus,'cartel agreements' have two opposite sides:one would lead to an efficiency situation and harm to social welfare; while, the other would be totally opposite. Owing to above, the traditional viewpoint in the antitrust law: 'big is bad' is absolutely wrong. The historic way that we treated' cartel agreements' following the Rule of Per Se, and ignored their effectiveness, had some impassable shortcomings. In recent decades, trying to keep an effective competition between undertakings and improve consumers (even social) welfare in the modern market has become more and more rational. Under such a situation, the Rule of Reason seems much better when we judge whether 'cartel agreements' is against the antitrust law or not. But what is the Rule of Reason? How to use this rule in the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings? The second question now is facing a difficult position in the PRC's Antitrust Law:The PRC's Antitrust Law solely provides a principle rule (the exempting agreements between undertakings must obey fair share of consumers and no elimination of competition), but gives any further explanations. So now the regulation of the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings lacks of operational capacity and experiences. After doing some research on the exempting agreements between undertakings of the EC competition law, it is easy to discover that the EC competition law and the PRC's antitrust law have same roots and goals. Due to all above situations, this dissertation will use the experience of the EC competition law for reference to examine some specific conditions of the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings.
Since competition is not always good for economy developing, and monopoly is not always bad, nowadays, the antitrust law acts as a government's tool to keep a balance between competition and monopoly.'Cartel Agreements' as one of essential and foundation issues in the antitrust law, they would follow the character of the antitrust law. Thus,'cartel agreements' have two opposite sides:one would lead to an efficiency situation and harm to social welfare; while, the other would be totally opposite. Owing to above, the traditional viewpoint in the antitrust law: 'big is bad' is absolutely wrong. The historic way that we treated' cartel agreements' following the Rule of Per Se, and ignored their effectiveness, had some impassable shortcomings. In recent decades, trying to keep an effective competition between undertakings and improve consumers (even social) welfare in the modern market has become more and more rational. Under such a situation, the Rule of Reason seems much better when we judge whether 'cartel agreements' is against the antitrust law or not. But what is the Rule of Reason? How to use this rule in the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings? The second question now is facing a difficult position in the PRC's Antitrust Law:The PRC's Antitrust Law solely provides a principle rule (the exempting agreements between undertakings must obey fair share of consumers and no elimination of competition), but gives any further explanations. So now the regulation of the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings lacks of operational capacity and experiences. After doing some research on the exempting agreements between undertakings of the EC competition law, it is easy to discover that the EC competition law and the PRC's antitrust law have same roots and goals. Due to all above situations, this dissertation will use the experience of the EC competition law for reference to examine some specific conditions of the exempting cartel agreements between undertakings.
引文
④TFEU:The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Official Journal of the European Union, C 115/49,9 May 2008. Treaty of Rome:The Treaty Establishing the European Community,25 March 1957.
⑤《欧盟运作条约》(TFEU)第101条(前《罗马条约》第81条)
⑦参考资料：许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
⑧参考资料:Samuelson, P. A. and W. D., Nordhaus, Economics(16th ed), Boston:Irwin McGraw Hill,1998, P313.
⑨参考资料：[美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003,导言,2页。
⑩参考资料：孔祥俊,反垄断法原理,北京：中国法制出版社,2001,412页。许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
11参考资料:Lars Kjolbye, The new Commission guidelines on the application of Article 81(3):an economic approach to Article 81, E. C. L. R.2004,25(9), P566-577.
12参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 34.
16参考资料:Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617.
17参考资料:Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch4, P272.
18参考资料Commission Decision in Glaxo Wellcome [2001] OJ L302, paras 139-41.
19参考资料:Richard Eccles, Parallel exports in the pharmaceuticals sector:taking nothing for granted, E. C. L.R.2007,28(2), P134-42.
20参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 53.
21参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 56.
22参考资料:Odudu, The Boundaries of EC Competition Law:The Scope of Article 81, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2006, Ch6.
23参考资料:G.Monti, Article 81 EC and Public Policy, [2002] CMLRev 1057,1090-1.
24参考资料:On industry under the EC Treaty note Article 157(ex Title ⅩⅢ).
25参考资料:On environmental protection under the EC Treaty note Article 6(ex Article 3(c)) and Articles 174-176(ex Title ⅩⅥ).
26参考资料:On employment under the EC Treaty note Articles 125-130(ex Title Ⅵa).
27参考资料:On economic and social cohesion under the EC Treaty note Articles 158-162(ex Title ⅩⅣ).
28参考资料:On culture under the EC Treaty note Article 151 (ex Article 128).
29参考资料:Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787, paras 30 & 31.
30参考资料:Commission Decision, Exxon/Shell [1994] OJ L144/20.
31参考资料:European Commission Decision, European Council of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances(CECED)[2000] OJ L187/47,[2000] 5 CMLR 635. Commission Decision, Stichting Baksteen [1994] OJ L131/15, para 27.
32参考资料:Case 26/76, Metro-SB-Grossmarkte GmbH v Commission(No.1) [1977] ECR 1857, [1978] 2 CMLR 1,paras 42-43.
33参考资料:Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617, para 36.
34参考资料:Case T-112/99, Metropole television (M6) and others, [2001] ECR 11-2459, para 107. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 30.
35参考资料:SA Binon & Cie v SA Agence et Messageries de la Presse [1985] ECR 2015, [1985] 3 CMLR 800, paras 45-6. Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch9, P764.
36参考资料:P&O Stena Lines [1999] OJ L163/61, [2000] 5 CMLR 682, paras 64-6.
37参考资料:Commission Decision in TPS, [1999] OJ L90/6, P6.
38参考资料Joined Cases T-374/94 and others, European Night Services, [1998] ECR Ⅱ-3141, para 230.
39参考资料:Kabel und Metallwerke Neumeyer AG and Etablissements Lunchaire SA Agreement [1975] OJ L222/34, [1975] CMLR D40, para 11. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 84.
40参考资料:Case C-238/05 Asnef-Equifax v Asociacion de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios(Ausbanc)[2006] ECR Ⅰ-11125, [2007] 4 CMLR 6, para 70.
41参考资料:Case T-86/95, Compagnie Generale Maritime and others, [2002] ECR Ⅱ-1011, paras 343-345.
42参考资料:Cases 56/64 Consten and Grunding v Commission [1996] ECR 299, [1966] CMLR 418.
43参考资料:Richard Whish, Competition Law(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009, Ch4, P158. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 98.
44参考资料:Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L. R. 2004,25(7),410-420.
45参考资料:Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch4, P282.
46参考资料：[美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003,第五章,172页。
47参考资料:Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787. Commission Decision, Bayer/BP Chemicals [1988] OJ L150/35, [1989] 4 CMLR 24.
48参考资料:Case 6/72, Europemballlage Corp and Continental Can Co Inc v Commission [1973] ECR 215, [1973] CMLR 199, para 32. Case T-62/98, Volkswagen AG v Commission [2000] 5 CMLR 853, para 231. Case T-374,375,384 and 388/94, European Night Services v Commission [1998] ECR Ⅱ-3141, [1998] 5 CMLR 718, paras 93-5 and 105.
49参考资料:Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L.R. 2004,25(7),410-420
1. 安建主编,中华人民共和国反垄断法释义,北京：法律出版社,2007。
2. 胡光志主编,欧盟竞争法前沿研究,北京：法律出版社,2005。
3. 孔祥俊,反垄断法原理,北京：中国法制出版社,2001。
4. 潘静成,刘文华,经济法(第三版),北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007。
5. 史际春等,反垄断法理解与适用,北京：中国发展出版社,2007。
6. 王晓晔,欧共体竞争法,北京：中国法制出版社,2001。
7. 许光耀,欧共体竞争立法,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2006。
8. 许光耀,欧共体竞争法经典判例研究,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008。
9. [美]基斯·N.希尔顿著,赵玲译,刘凯校,反垄断法：经济学原理和普通法演进,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
10. [美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003。
11. Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008.
12. Barry Rodger and Angus MacCulloch, Competition Law and Policy in the EC and UK(4th ed), London:Routledge-Cavendish,2009.
13. David J. Gerber, Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2001.
14. J. Faull and A. Nikpay, The EC Law of Competition(2nd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2007.
15. Kirsty Middleton, Barry Rodger, Angus MacCulloch and Jonathan Galloway, Cases & Materials on UK & EC Competition Law(2nd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
16. Mark Furse, Competition Law of the EC and UK(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008.
17. Odudu, The Boundaries of EC Competition Law:The Scope of Article 81, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2006.
18. Richard Whish, Competition Law(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
19. Roger Zach, Andreas Heinemann and Andreas Kellerhals, The Development of Competition Law:Global Perspectives, Academic Society for Competition Law, Cheltenham, Northampton:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2008.
20. Samuelson, P. A. and W. D., Nordhaus, Economics(16th ed), Boston: Irwin McGraw Hill,1998.
21. Simon Bishop and Mike Walker, The Economics of EC Competition Law: Concepts, Application and Measurement(3rd ed), London:Sweet & Maxwell, 2010.
1. 陈叶,企业垄断协议豁免制度的不足与完善建议,商业现代化,2009年,第28期。
2. 高俊杰,沈佼,美国与欧盟垄断协议豁免制度的比较分析及其借鉴意义,延安大学学报(社会科学版),2008年,第1期。
3. 李劫,我国《反垄断法》垄断协议豁免的法律解读与评判,国际商报,2009年9月29日,11版。
4. 许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
5. 许光耀, 《反垄断法》中垄断协议诸条款之评析,法学杂志,2008,第1期。
6. 余菲,论建立和完善我国出口卡特尔反垄断豁免审查制度,法学杂志,2008年,第4期。
7. 余菲,试探美国出口垄断协议豁免制度及其对我国的借鉴,WTO经济导刊,2007年,第11期。
8. G.Monti, Article 81 EC and Public Policy, [2002] CMLRev 1057,1090-1.
9. Halil Rahman Basaran, How should Article 81 EC address agreements that yield environmental benefits, E. C. L. R.2006,27(9), P479-484.
10. Kroes. N, European Competition Policy:Delivering Better Markets and Better Choices, Speech of 15 September 2005.
11. Lars Kjolbye, The new Commission guidelines on the application of Article 81(3):an economic approach to Article 81, E. C. L. R.2004,25(9).
12. Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L. R.2004,25(7),410-420.
13. Richard Eccles, Parallel exports in the pharmaceuticals sector: taking nothing for granted, E.C. L. R.2007,28(2).
1. 《中华人民共和国反垄断法》
2. Commission Notice on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition under Article 81(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (2001/C 368/07)
3. Commission Notice on the definition of the relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law (OJ 1997, C-372/5)
4. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08)
5. Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Rules on competition)
6. EC Treaty (The Treaty Establishing the European Community (Treaty of Rome,25 March 1957, revised))
7. European Commission Decision, European Council of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances (CECED) [2000] OJ L187/47, [2000] 5 CMLR 635
8. TFEU (The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, C 115/49, 9.5.2008)
9. The Commission's White Paper on Modernization OJ [2000] C 365 E/28, [2001] 5 CMLR 1148
1. Case 26/76, Metro-SB-Grossmarkte GmbH v Commission(No.1) [1977] ECR 1857, [1978] 2 CMLR 1.
2. Case 322/81 Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461.
3. Case 6/72, Europemballlage Corp and Continental Can Co Inc v Commission [1973] ECR 215, [1973] CMLR 199.
4. Case C-238/05 Asnef-Equifax v Asociacion de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc) [2006] ECR 1-11125, [2007] 4 CMLR 6.
5. Case T-112/99, Metropole television (M6) and others, [2001] ECR Ⅱ-2459.
6. Case T-168/01 GlaxoSmithKline Services Ltd v Commission [2006] ECR 11-2969, [2006] 5 CMLR 29.
7. Case T-228/97, Irish Sugar, [1999] ECR Ⅱ-2969.
8. Case T-374,375,384 and 388/94, European Night Services v Commission [1998] ECR 11-3141, [1998] 5 CMLR 718.
9. Case T-62/98, Volkswagen AG v Commission [2000] 5 CMLR 853.
10. Case T-65/98 Van den Bergh Foods, October 23,2003, not yet reported.
11. Case T-86/95, Compagnie Generale Maritime and others, [2002] ECR 11-1011.
12. Cases 56/64 Consten and Grunding v Commission [1996] ECR 299, [1966] CMLR 418.
13. Commission Decision in Glaxo Wellcome [2001] OJ L302.
14. Commission Decision in TPS, [1999] OJ L90/6。
15. Commission Decision, Bayer/BP Chemicals [1988] OJ L150/35, [1989] 4 CMLR 24。
16. Commission Decision, Exxon/Shell [1994] OJ L144/20。
17. Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617.
18. Commission Decision, Societe Air France/Alitalia Linee Aeree Italiane SpA, [2004] OJ L362.
19. Commission Decision, Stichting Baksteen [1994] OJ L131/15.
20. Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787.
21. Joined Cases T-374/94 and others, European Night Services, [1998] ECR 11-3141.
22. Kabel und Metallwerke Neumeyer AG and Etablissements Lunchaire SA Agreement [1975] OJ L222/34, [1975] CMLR D40.
23. P&0 Stena Lines [1999] OJ L163/61, [2000] 5 CMLR 682.
24. SA Binon & Cie v SA Agence et Messageries de la Presse [1985] ECR 2015, [1985] 3 CMLR 800.
⑤《欧盟运作条约》(TFEU)第101条(前《罗马条约》第81条)
⑦参考资料：许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
⑧参考资料:Samuelson, P. A. and W. D., Nordhaus, Economics(16th ed), Boston:Irwin McGraw Hill,1998, P313.
⑨参考资料：[美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003,导言,2页。
⑩参考资料：孔祥俊,反垄断法原理,北京：中国法制出版社,2001,412页。许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
11参考资料:Lars Kjolbye, The new Commission guidelines on the application of Article 81(3):an economic approach to Article 81, E. C. L. R.2004,25(9), P566-577.
12参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 34.
16参考资料:Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617.
17参考资料:Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch4, P272.
18参考资料Commission Decision in Glaxo Wellcome [2001] OJ L302, paras 139-41.
19参考资料:Richard Eccles, Parallel exports in the pharmaceuticals sector:taking nothing for granted, E. C. L.R.2007,28(2), P134-42.
20参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 53.
21参考资料:Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 56.
22参考资料:Odudu, The Boundaries of EC Competition Law:The Scope of Article 81, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2006, Ch6.
23参考资料:G.Monti, Article 81 EC and Public Policy, [2002] CMLRev 1057,1090-1.
24参考资料:On industry under the EC Treaty note Article 157(ex Title ⅩⅢ).
25参考资料:On environmental protection under the EC Treaty note Article 6(ex Article 3(c)) and Articles 174-176(ex Title ⅩⅥ).
26参考资料:On employment under the EC Treaty note Articles 125-130(ex Title Ⅵa).
27参考资料:On economic and social cohesion under the EC Treaty note Articles 158-162(ex Title ⅩⅣ).
28参考资料:On culture under the EC Treaty note Article 151 (ex Article 128).
29参考资料:Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787, paras 30 & 31.
30参考资料:Commission Decision, Exxon/Shell [1994] OJ L144/20.
31参考资料:European Commission Decision, European Council of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances(CECED)[2000] OJ L187/47,[2000] 5 CMLR 635. Commission Decision, Stichting Baksteen [1994] OJ L131/15, para 27.
32参考资料:Case 26/76, Metro-SB-Grossmarkte GmbH v Commission(No.1) [1977] ECR 1857, [1978] 2 CMLR 1,paras 42-43.
33参考资料:Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617, para 36.
34参考资料:Case T-112/99, Metropole television (M6) and others, [2001] ECR 11-2459, para 107. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 30.
35参考资料:SA Binon & Cie v SA Agence et Messageries de la Presse [1985] ECR 2015, [1985] 3 CMLR 800, paras 45-6. Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch9, P764.
36参考资料:P&O Stena Lines [1999] OJ L163/61, [2000] 5 CMLR 682, paras 64-6.
37参考资料:Commission Decision in TPS, [1999] OJ L90/6, P6.
38参考资料Joined Cases T-374/94 and others, European Night Services, [1998] ECR Ⅱ-3141, para 230.
39参考资料:Kabel und Metallwerke Neumeyer AG and Etablissements Lunchaire SA Agreement [1975] OJ L222/34, [1975] CMLR D40, para 11. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 84.
40参考资料:Case C-238/05 Asnef-Equifax v Asociacion de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios(Ausbanc)[2006] ECR Ⅰ-11125, [2007] 4 CMLR 6, para 70.
41参考资料:Case T-86/95, Compagnie Generale Maritime and others, [2002] ECR Ⅱ-1011, paras 343-345.
42参考资料:Cases 56/64 Consten and Grunding v Commission [1996] ECR 299, [1966] CMLR 418.
43参考资料:Richard Whish, Competition Law(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009, Ch4, P158. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08), para 98.
44参考资料:Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L. R. 2004,25(7),410-420.
45参考资料:Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008, Ch4, P282.
46参考资料：[美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003,第五章,172页。
47参考资料:Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787. Commission Decision, Bayer/BP Chemicals [1988] OJ L150/35, [1989] 4 CMLR 24.
48参考资料:Case 6/72, Europemballlage Corp and Continental Can Co Inc v Commission [1973] ECR 215, [1973] CMLR 199, para 32. Case T-62/98, Volkswagen AG v Commission [2000] 5 CMLR 853, para 231. Case T-374,375,384 and 388/94, European Night Services v Commission [1998] ECR Ⅱ-3141, [1998] 5 CMLR 718, paras 93-5 and 105.
49参考资料:Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L.R. 2004,25(7),410-420
1. 安建主编,中华人民共和国反垄断法释义,北京：法律出版社,2007。
2. 胡光志主编,欧盟竞争法前沿研究,北京：法律出版社,2005。
3. 孔祥俊,反垄断法原理,北京：中国法制出版社,2001。
4. 潘静成,刘文华,经济法(第三版),北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007。
5. 史际春等,反垄断法理解与适用,北京：中国发展出版社,2007。
6. 王晓晔,欧共体竞争法,北京：中国法制出版社,2001。
7. 许光耀,欧共体竞争立法,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2006。
8. 许光耀,欧共体竞争法经典判例研究,武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008。
9. [美]基斯·N.希尔顿著,赵玲译,刘凯校,反垄断法：经济学原理和普通法演进,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
10. [美]理查德·A·波斯纳著,孙秋宁译,反托拉斯法(第二版),北京：中国政法大学出版社,2003。
11. Alison Jones and Brenda Sufrin, EC Competition Law:Text, Cases, and Materials(3rd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008.
12. Barry Rodger and Angus MacCulloch, Competition Law and Policy in the EC and UK(4th ed), London:Routledge-Cavendish,2009.
13. David J. Gerber, Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2001.
14. J. Faull and A. Nikpay, The EC Law of Competition(2nd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2007.
15. Kirsty Middleton, Barry Rodger, Angus MacCulloch and Jonathan Galloway, Cases & Materials on UK & EC Competition Law(2nd ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
16. Mark Furse, Competition Law of the EC and UK(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2008.
17. Odudu, The Boundaries of EC Competition Law:The Scope of Article 81, Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2006.
18. Richard Whish, Competition Law(6th ed), Oxford, New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
19. Roger Zach, Andreas Heinemann and Andreas Kellerhals, The Development of Competition Law:Global Perspectives, Academic Society for Competition Law, Cheltenham, Northampton:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2008.
20. Samuelson, P. A. and W. D., Nordhaus, Economics(16th ed), Boston: Irwin McGraw Hill,1998.
21. Simon Bishop and Mike Walker, The Economics of EC Competition Law: Concepts, Application and Measurement(3rd ed), London:Sweet & Maxwell, 2010.
1. 陈叶,企业垄断协议豁免制度的不足与完善建议,商业现代化,2009年,第28期。
2. 高俊杰,沈佼,美国与欧盟垄断协议豁免制度的比较分析及其借鉴意义,延安大学学报(社会科学版),2008年,第1期。
3. 李劫,我国《反垄断法》垄断协议豁免的法律解读与评判,国际商报,2009年9月29日,11版。
4. 许光耀,“合理原则”及其立法模式比较,法学评论,2005,第2期。
5. 许光耀, 《反垄断法》中垄断协议诸条款之评析,法学杂志,2008,第1期。
6. 余菲,论建立和完善我国出口卡特尔反垄断豁免审查制度,法学杂志,2008年,第4期。
7. 余菲,试探美国出口垄断协议豁免制度及其对我国的借鉴,WTO经济导刊,2007年,第11期。
8. G.Monti, Article 81 EC and Public Policy, [2002] CMLRev 1057,1090-1.
9. Halil Rahman Basaran, How should Article 81 EC address agreements that yield environmental benefits, E. C. L. R.2006,27(9), P479-484.
10. Kroes. N, European Competition Policy:Delivering Better Markets and Better Choices, Speech of 15 September 2005.
11. Lars Kjolbye, The new Commission guidelines on the application of Article 81(3):an economic approach to Article 81, E. C. L. R.2004,25(9).
12. Paul Lugard and Leigh Hancher, Honey, I shrunk the Article! A critical assessment of the Commission's Notice on Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty, E. C. L. R.2004,25(7),410-420.
13. Richard Eccles, Parallel exports in the pharmaceuticals sector: taking nothing for granted, E.C. L. R.2007,28(2).
1. 《中华人民共和国反垄断法》
2. Commission Notice on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition under Article 81(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (2001/C 368/07)
3. Commission Notice on the definition of the relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law (OJ 1997, C-372/5)
4. Communication From The Commission Notice, Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty (2004/C 101/08)
5. Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Rules on competition)
6. EC Treaty (The Treaty Establishing the European Community (Treaty of Rome,25 March 1957, revised))
7. European Commission Decision, European Council of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances (CECED) [2000] OJ L187/47, [2000] 5 CMLR 635
8. TFEU (The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, C 115/49, 9.5.2008)
9. The Commission's White Paper on Modernization OJ [2000] C 365 E/28, [2001] 5 CMLR 1148
1. Case 26/76, Metro-SB-Grossmarkte GmbH v Commission(No.1) [1977] ECR 1857, [1978] 2 CMLR 1.
2. Case 322/81 Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461.
3. Case 6/72, Europemballlage Corp and Continental Can Co Inc v Commission [1973] ECR 215, [1973] CMLR 199.
4. Case C-238/05 Asnef-Equifax v Asociacion de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc) [2006] ECR 1-11125, [2007] 4 CMLR 6.
5. Case T-112/99, Metropole television (M6) and others, [2001] ECR Ⅱ-2459.
6. Case T-168/01 GlaxoSmithKline Services Ltd v Commission [2006] ECR 11-2969, [2006] 5 CMLR 29.
7. Case T-228/97, Irish Sugar, [1999] ECR Ⅱ-2969.
8. Case T-374,375,384 and 388/94, European Night Services v Commission [1998] ECR 11-3141, [1998] 5 CMLR 718.
9. Case T-62/98, Volkswagen AG v Commission [2000] 5 CMLR 853.
10. Case T-65/98 Van den Bergh Foods, October 23,2003, not yet reported.
11. Case T-86/95, Compagnie Generale Maritime and others, [2002] ECR 11-1011.
12. Cases 56/64 Consten and Grunding v Commission [1996] ECR 299, [1966] CMLR 418.
13. Commission Decision in Glaxo Wellcome [2001] OJ L302.
14. Commission Decision in TPS, [1999] OJ L90/6。
15. Commission Decision, Bayer/BP Chemicals [1988] OJ L150/35, [1989] 4 CMLR 24。
16. Commission Decision, Exxon/Shell [1994] OJ L144/20。
17. Commission Decision, Ford/Volkswagen [1993] OJ L20/14, [1993] 5 CMLR 617.
18. Commission Decision, Societe Air France/Alitalia Linee Aeree Italiane SpA, [2004] OJ L362.
19. Commission Decision, Stichting Baksteen [1994] OJ L131/15.
20. Commission Decision, Synthetic Fibres [1984] OJ L207/17, [1985] 1 CMLR 787.
21. Joined Cases T-374/94 and others, European Night Services, [1998] ECR 11-3141.
22. Kabel und Metallwerke Neumeyer AG and Etablissements Lunchaire SA Agreement [1975] OJ L222/34, [1975] CMLR D40.
23. P&0 Stena Lines [1999] OJ L163/61, [2000] 5 CMLR 682.
24. SA Binon & Cie v SA Agence et Messageries de la Presse [1985] ECR 2015, [1985] 3 CMLR 800.