反垄断法不确定性问题研究
|
摘要
本文采用经济分析法，对反垄断法不确定性进行制度分析。从作为经济政治现象的垄断及其衍生物的不确定性入手，透析垄断法律制度不确定性的表现及其必然带来的交易成本，提出了减少反垄断法不确定性的有效途径和方法，并对我国反垄断立法提出了几点切实可行的减少不确定性的制度建议。
反垄断法是市场经济中的基本法律，它是确立保护“公平竞争”的市场行为规则，是明确人为垄断的反社会性质并宣布其非法。作为规范、防止、限制、甚至是禁止垄断的法律，它涉及的不是一个或几个企业，而是一个地区或一国，甚至是多国的经济，因此，反垄断法涉及的范围相当广，内容相当多，概念的定义和行为或结构的违法性难以确定。而且，反垄断法中占支配地位的违法确认原则是以行为的效果为违法的标准，因而难以形成一般法律所具有的由权利、义务、责任构成的规则等级体系，从而使反垄断法缺少一般法律所具有的语义逻辑性，这一方面增强了反垄断法的不确定性，另一方面也增加了反垄断法的经济性，使经济分析方法成为反垄断法确认事实因素和行为违法性的必不可少的工具。
法律是包含权利、义务的规则，是行为的规范，法律概念与法律规则的确定性是法律的应有属性，不断地寻求精确化的结论和解释是法律发展的目标。然而，作为市场经济的基本法律的反垄断法，却具有自身的性质和规律，它的规则表现出大量的不确定性。
反垄断反托拉斯法兴起和发展阶段属结构主义，而二十世纪后期反垄断法在世界范围内的发展趋势是抛弃结构主义，改采行为主义。我认为，正确的思路应该是实行结构主义和行为主义的结合，两者有机的结合，必然衍生出不确定性。确定域内适用与域外适用的实质，是一个国家的反垄断法可否单方具有域外效力。我认为，中国垄断立法不仅具有域内适用效力也应该具有域外适用效力，双重效力将导致反垄断法的不确定性。反垄断法的违法确认及合理原则的不确定性使反垄断法较之于其他部门法具有更强的不确定性。依据经济政策对反垄断法进行解释并没有消除这些不确定性。因为这些政策并没有解决垄断的
摘要
不确定性问题，因而与反垄断法所具有的相同性质一样，这些政策也一直存有争议。一部
法典的目的并不是单一的，反垄断法亦然。许多不同的目的在反垄断法中得到实现。但是
对于具体的规则在法律中所要实现的目的常是惟一的，如以合理原则作为违法确认标准的
规则常是追求消费者福利的最大化。而其他一些规则所追求的目的却可能与此相背，并不
利于资源的有效配置和生产效益。因此，在反垄断法中，这些目的会是不连接的和相互冲
突的。综上所述以上五种反垄断法不确定性表现，构成了反垄断法的不确定性。
本文认为，反垄断法规则的不确定性的克服主要是通过三个方面来实现的，一是加强
竞争管理机构的建设和功能的发挥。通过专门竞争管理机构来加以减少。由于垄断问题涉
及的范围广，内容颇为复杂，需要一个专业化的机构来负责法律的实施。二是加大法院作
用的力度。法院在减少反垄断法的不确定性中具有最终的决定性作用，通过法官的判案，
法律最终从规则的不确定走向个案的确定性。三是增强反垄断立法中经济分析法。通过法
律的解释，对于本身违法的规定依据一般的法律解释方法可以减少其不确定性，而对于含
有交易效率原则的规则，则需要借助于经济学的解释。
The economy analytical approach is employed in this essay to conduct a system analysis on the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly laws. By approaching of the indefmiteness of monopoly as an economy-political phenomenon and its derivation, the author analyzes the manifestation of the indefmiteness of the monopoly laws and the corresponding dealing cost, produces the effective approaches to reducing the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws and offers several productive advices on diminishing the indefmiteness to our nation's anti-monopoly legislation.
Anti-monopoly laws are fundamental in the marketing economy. They establish and protect "equal competition". They make clear the counter-sociality nature of the intentional monopoly and declare it illegal. As a law to regulate, prevent, restrict, even to ban the monopoly, the anti-monopoly laws cover the economy of not only one or several enterprises, but of a region or a nation, even of many countries. Hence, the anti-monopoly laws cover widely with a lot of contents, the defining of the conception and the illegality of the activities or organizations is indefinite. Moreover, the illegality definition rule which is dominating in the anti-monopoly laws is based on the effect of the activities, so it is hard to own an order system that is formed with rights, obligations and responsibilities like in the common laws. This makes it hard to have the semantic logic the common laws have. All of this, on the one hand, strengthens the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws, but on the other hand, it increases its ec
onomic meaning, and therefore, the economy analytical approach turns to be an indispensable way to identify facts and the illegality of activities.
Law is a rule containing rights and obligations, a rule to regulate activities. The definiteness of the law conceptions and law rules is the due attribute of law. To seek for a definite conclusion and analysis is the goal of
Law is developing. However, as a fundamental law of the marketing economy, the anti-monopoly laws have its own nature and pattern. Its rules display much indefiniteness.
The rise and development of anti-monopoly -anti-trust belongs to the structuralism stage, while in late 20th century the world-wide developing tendency of the anti-monopoly laws is to give up structuralism and adopt the behaviorism. I think the right way should be the combination of both structuralism and behaviorism. The organic combination of both will result is indefiniteness. The essence of defining domestic and abroad application is to find whether the law has the abroad power. I assume that the Chinese monopoly legislation should be of both domestic and abroad application power. The doubled power will lead to the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly laws. The indefiniteness of the illegality identification and the rational rule of the antimonopoly laws result in more indefiniteness in anti-monopoly laws than in the other branch laws. To examine the anti-monopoly laws with the economic policies can not erase the indefiniteness, for these policies don't provide the indefiniteness with solutions. Therefore, just like debate existing in the nature of the anti-monopoly laws, debate exists in these policies. The intention of a law isn't single, same to the anti-monopoly laws. Many different intentions awp carried out in the anti-monopoly laws. But the intention of the application of specific rules is single. For example, the intention of the rational rule as a standard to identify illegal action is to search for the maximum benefits Off consumers. The intention of the other rules may be contrary to this one, it doesn't do well to the efficient arrangement of resources and production. So in the anti-monopoly laws, these intentions will not be successive and will be
in conflicts. In short, the five forms of the indefmiteness of anti-monopoly laws mentioned above constitute the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws.
In my opinion, there are three solutions to solve the problem of the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly la
反垄断法是市场经济中的基本法律，它是确立保护“公平竞争”的市场行为规则，是明确人为垄断的反社会性质并宣布其非法。作为规范、防止、限制、甚至是禁止垄断的法律，它涉及的不是一个或几个企业，而是一个地区或一国，甚至是多国的经济，因此，反垄断法涉及的范围相当广，内容相当多，概念的定义和行为或结构的违法性难以确定。而且，反垄断法中占支配地位的违法确认原则是以行为的效果为违法的标准，因而难以形成一般法律所具有的由权利、义务、责任构成的规则等级体系，从而使反垄断法缺少一般法律所具有的语义逻辑性，这一方面增强了反垄断法的不确定性，另一方面也增加了反垄断法的经济性，使经济分析方法成为反垄断法确认事实因素和行为违法性的必不可少的工具。
法律是包含权利、义务的规则，是行为的规范，法律概念与法律规则的确定性是法律的应有属性，不断地寻求精确化的结论和解释是法律发展的目标。然而，作为市场经济的基本法律的反垄断法，却具有自身的性质和规律，它的规则表现出大量的不确定性。
反垄断反托拉斯法兴起和发展阶段属结构主义，而二十世纪后期反垄断法在世界范围内的发展趋势是抛弃结构主义，改采行为主义。我认为，正确的思路应该是实行结构主义和行为主义的结合，两者有机的结合，必然衍生出不确定性。确定域内适用与域外适用的实质，是一个国家的反垄断法可否单方具有域外效力。我认为，中国垄断立法不仅具有域内适用效力也应该具有域外适用效力，双重效力将导致反垄断法的不确定性。反垄断法的违法确认及合理原则的不确定性使反垄断法较之于其他部门法具有更强的不确定性。依据经济政策对反垄断法进行解释并没有消除这些不确定性。因为这些政策并没有解决垄断的
摘要
不确定性问题，因而与反垄断法所具有的相同性质一样，这些政策也一直存有争议。一部
法典的目的并不是单一的，反垄断法亦然。许多不同的目的在反垄断法中得到实现。但是
对于具体的规则在法律中所要实现的目的常是惟一的，如以合理原则作为违法确认标准的
规则常是追求消费者福利的最大化。而其他一些规则所追求的目的却可能与此相背，并不
利于资源的有效配置和生产效益。因此，在反垄断法中，这些目的会是不连接的和相互冲
突的。综上所述以上五种反垄断法不确定性表现，构成了反垄断法的不确定性。
本文认为，反垄断法规则的不确定性的克服主要是通过三个方面来实现的，一是加强
竞争管理机构的建设和功能的发挥。通过专门竞争管理机构来加以减少。由于垄断问题涉
及的范围广，内容颇为复杂，需要一个专业化的机构来负责法律的实施。二是加大法院作
用的力度。法院在减少反垄断法的不确定性中具有最终的决定性作用，通过法官的判案，
法律最终从规则的不确定走向个案的确定性。三是增强反垄断立法中经济分析法。通过法
律的解释，对于本身违法的规定依据一般的法律解释方法可以减少其不确定性，而对于含
有交易效率原则的规则，则需要借助于经济学的解释。
The economy analytical approach is employed in this essay to conduct a system analysis on the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly laws. By approaching of the indefmiteness of monopoly as an economy-political phenomenon and its derivation, the author analyzes the manifestation of the indefmiteness of the monopoly laws and the corresponding dealing cost, produces the effective approaches to reducing the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws and offers several productive advices on diminishing the indefmiteness to our nation's anti-monopoly legislation.
Anti-monopoly laws are fundamental in the marketing economy. They establish and protect "equal competition". They make clear the counter-sociality nature of the intentional monopoly and declare it illegal. As a law to regulate, prevent, restrict, even to ban the monopoly, the anti-monopoly laws cover the economy of not only one or several enterprises, but of a region or a nation, even of many countries. Hence, the anti-monopoly laws cover widely with a lot of contents, the defining of the conception and the illegality of the activities or organizations is indefinite. Moreover, the illegality definition rule which is dominating in the anti-monopoly laws is based on the effect of the activities, so it is hard to own an order system that is formed with rights, obligations and responsibilities like in the common laws. This makes it hard to have the semantic logic the common laws have. All of this, on the one hand, strengthens the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws, but on the other hand, it increases its ec
onomic meaning, and therefore, the economy analytical approach turns to be an indispensable way to identify facts and the illegality of activities.
Law is a rule containing rights and obligations, a rule to regulate activities. The definiteness of the law conceptions and law rules is the due attribute of law. To seek for a definite conclusion and analysis is the goal of
Law is developing. However, as a fundamental law of the marketing economy, the anti-monopoly laws have its own nature and pattern. Its rules display much indefiniteness.
The rise and development of anti-monopoly -anti-trust belongs to the structuralism stage, while in late 20th century the world-wide developing tendency of the anti-monopoly laws is to give up structuralism and adopt the behaviorism. I think the right way should be the combination of both structuralism and behaviorism. The organic combination of both will result is indefiniteness. The essence of defining domestic and abroad application is to find whether the law has the abroad power. I assume that the Chinese monopoly legislation should be of both domestic and abroad application power. The doubled power will lead to the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly laws. The indefiniteness of the illegality identification and the rational rule of the antimonopoly laws result in more indefiniteness in anti-monopoly laws than in the other branch laws. To examine the anti-monopoly laws with the economic policies can not erase the indefiniteness, for these policies don't provide the indefiniteness with solutions. Therefore, just like debate existing in the nature of the anti-monopoly laws, debate exists in these policies. The intention of a law isn't single, same to the anti-monopoly laws. Many different intentions awp carried out in the anti-monopoly laws. But the intention of the application of specific rules is single. For example, the intention of the rational rule as a standard to identify illegal action is to search for the maximum benefits Off consumers. The intention of the other rules may be contrary to this one, it doesn't do well to the efficient arrangement of resources and production. So in the anti-monopoly laws, these intentions will not be successive and will be
in conflicts. In short, the five forms of the indefmiteness of anti-monopoly laws mentioned above constitute the indefmiteness of the anti-monopoly laws.
In my opinion, there are three solutions to solve the problem of the indefiniteness of the anti-monopoly la
引文
1、《列宁选集》第2卷
2、《现代竞争法的理论与实践》，法律出版社
3、赵万一著：《中国竞争保护法律制度研究》，重庆大学出版社，1996年版，
4、保罗·A·萨缪尔森，威廉·D·诺德豪斯，胡代光等译：《经济学》(第14版)(上)，北京经济学院出版社1996年版
5、[美]波斯纳著，苏力译：《法理学问题》，中国政法大学出版社1994年版
6、周楠：．《罗马法原论》(上)，商务印书馆1994年版
7、斯蒂格利茨：《经济学》，中国人民大学出版社1998年版
8、樊纲：《市场机制与经济效率》，三联书店1993年版
9、漆多俊主编：《经济法学》，武汉大学出版社1998年版
10、李昌麒主编：《经济法学》，中国政法大学出版社1999年版
11、王艳林主编：《竞争法导论》，中国地质大学出版社1991年版
12、王晓晔编：《反垄断法与市场经济》，法律出版社1998年版
13、曹士兵：《反垄断法研究》，法律出版社1996年版
14、漆多俊主编：《经济法论丛》(第1卷、第2卷)，方正出版社1999年版
15、种明钊主编：《竞争法》，法律出版社1997年版
16、吴炯著：《维护公平竞争法》，法律出版社1998年版
17、韦斯库斯：《反垄断与管制经济学》，机械工业出版社2004年版
18、伯吉斯《管制与反垄断经济学》，上海财经大学出版社2003年版
19、何之迈《公平交易法》，中国政法大学出版社2004年版
20、青木昌彦《市场的作用与国家的作用》，中国发展出版社2002年版
21、孔祥俊《反垄断法原理》，
22、阿维纳什K．迪克西特《经济政策的制定：交易成本政治学的视角》，中国人大学出版
社2004年版
23、大卫．弗里德曼 著：《经济学语境下的法律规则》，法律出版社2004年版
24、[美]波斯纳著，蒋兆康译：《法律的经济分析》(上)，中国大百科全书出版社1996年版
1、Thomas W. Dunfee, Frank F. Gibson: Antitrust and Trade Regulation, John Wiley &. Sons 1989
2、Julian Lonbay: Frontier of the Competition Law, Chancery Law Publishing ltd, 1993
5、Thomas W. Dunfcc, Frank F. Gibson, Antitrust and Trade Regular ion (1989)
2、《现代竞争法的理论与实践》，法律出版社
3、赵万一著：《中国竞争保护法律制度研究》，重庆大学出版社，1996年版，
4、保罗·A·萨缪尔森，威廉·D·诺德豪斯，胡代光等译：《经济学》(第14版)(上)，北京经济学院出版社1996年版
5、[美]波斯纳著，苏力译：《法理学问题》，中国政法大学出版社1994年版
6、周楠：．《罗马法原论》(上)，商务印书馆1994年版
7、斯蒂格利茨：《经济学》，中国人民大学出版社1998年版
8、樊纲：《市场机制与经济效率》，三联书店1993年版
9、漆多俊主编：《经济法学》，武汉大学出版社1998年版
10、李昌麒主编：《经济法学》，中国政法大学出版社1999年版
11、王艳林主编：《竞争法导论》，中国地质大学出版社1991年版
12、王晓晔编：《反垄断法与市场经济》，法律出版社1998年版
13、曹士兵：《反垄断法研究》，法律出版社1996年版
14、漆多俊主编：《经济法论丛》(第1卷、第2卷)，方正出版社1999年版
15、种明钊主编：《竞争法》，法律出版社1997年版
16、吴炯著：《维护公平竞争法》，法律出版社1998年版
17、韦斯库斯：《反垄断与管制经济学》，机械工业出版社2004年版
18、伯吉斯《管制与反垄断经济学》，上海财经大学出版社2003年版
19、何之迈《公平交易法》，中国政法大学出版社2004年版
20、青木昌彦《市场的作用与国家的作用》，中国发展出版社2002年版
21、孔祥俊《反垄断法原理》，
22、阿维纳什K．迪克西特《经济政策的制定：交易成本政治学的视角》，中国人大学出版
社2004年版
23、大卫．弗里德曼 著：《经济学语境下的法律规则》，法律出版社2004年版
24、[美]波斯纳著，蒋兆康译：《法律的经济分析》(上)，中国大百科全书出版社1996年版
1、Thomas W. Dunfee, Frank F. Gibson: Antitrust and Trade Regulation, John Wiley &. Sons 1989
2、Julian Lonbay: Frontier of the Competition Law, Chancery Law Publishing ltd, 1993
5、Thomas W. Dunfcc, Frank F. Gibson, Antitrust and Trade Regular ion (1989)