反垄断法中的同一经济实体理论研究

发布时间：2018-06-29 13:05

本文选题：反垄断法 + 企业集团　；参考：《华东政法大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：由于企业集团这一组织形式所带来的规模效益,全球越来越多的企业选择采用企业集团来增强其在市场中的竞争力。但是企业集团这一组织形式却对传统的法律结构带来了巨大的挑战。传统商事法律着重的是单个企业,而企业集团既不是单个企业,也不是几个企业的简单联合,其内部成员企业之间是既统一又独立的关系。这种复杂的关系使得传统的法律在企业集团的适用上出现了问题。体现在反垄断法律,企业集团带来的问题就是在认定垄断行为的主体时,应当将企业集团中的成员企业视为几个独立的主体还是将其视为同一经济实体来进行考量。如果视为同一经济实体,则成员企业之间的行为就类似于同一企业内的各部门之间的行为,而不应受到反垄断法的规制。美国作为反垄断法发展最早、立法最为成熟的国家,通过其案例法的发展,形成了“同一经济实体”理论以解决企业集团所带来的反垄断行为主体认定的困境。目前我国学界对于反垄断法中垄断行为的构成条件和审查标准的研究居多,对于垄断行为主体,特别是对企业集团成员作为垄断行为的主体的研究比较少。我国反垄断法研究起步较晚,《反垄断法》的制定也不过短短的八年,在立法上还有很多缺陷。好在西方国家在同一经济实体理论方面已有了一些有益的探索,给我们提供了一些借鉴的可能。本文的目的即试图通过对外国法的考察和比较,研究企业集团给反垄断法带来的挑战及解决对策,并为我国反垄断法的发展提供一些借鉴。首先,本文探讨了同一经济实体提出的经济现实和理论背景。同一经济实体理论的产生与企业集团这一组织形式密不可分,因而本文继而对企业集团的概念和性质进行了研究,并对企业集团的相关概念,包括母子公司、关联企业、控股公司进行了辨析。其次,鉴于美国、德国等国及欧盟的反垄断法立法较早且发展较为成熟,本文按照垄断协议、滥用市场支配地位和经营者集中这三大反垄断法支柱领域对“同一经济实体”理论在各国立法和司法实践中的体现进行考察,并选取了典型案例分析了美国法院如何区别运用同一经济实体理论针对不同案件的经济现实来处理企业集团成员企业之间可能产生限制竞争效果的行为,并从中窥见“同一经济实体”理论在美国的滥觞、发展和完善。再次,本文以公司的控制权为中心,在考察美国和德国立法与司法实践的基础上,分析企业集团的核心关系——母子公司关系的形成,为同一经济实体认定的标准的论证奠定了基础。最后,本文分析了我国反垄断立法和实践中的不足,并结合我国的国情和经济现实提出了应对企业集团对反垄断主体认定带来的困境的对策。
[Abstract]:Because of the scale benefit brought by enterprise group, more and more enterprises around the world choose to use enterprise group to enhance their competitiveness in the market. But the organization form of enterprise group has brought great challenge to the traditional legal structure. The traditional commercial law emphasizes the single enterprise, and the enterprise group is neither a single enterprise nor a simple union of several enterprises, and the relationship among its members is both unified and independent. This complex relationship makes the application of traditional law in enterprise groups appear problems. Reflected in the antitrust law, the problem brought by enterprise group is that the member enterprises in the enterprise group should be considered as several independent subjects or as the same economic entity when determining the subject of monopoly behavior. If it is regarded as the same economic entity, the behavior of the member enterprises is similar to that of the departments within the same enterprise, and should not be regulated by the anti-monopoly law. The United States, as the country with the earliest development of anti-monopoly law and the most mature legislation, has formed the theory of "the same economic entity" to solve the dilemma of the identification of the main body of antitrust behavior brought by the enterprise group through the development of its case law. At present, the academic circles of our country mainly study the constitution condition and the examination standard of the monopoly behavior in the anti-monopoly law, but the research on the subject of monopoly behavior, especially the member of the enterprise group as the main body of the monopoly behavior is relatively few. The study of anti-monopoly law in our country started late, and the formulation of anti-monopoly law is only eight years, and there are still many defects in legislation. Good in the western countries in the same economic entity theory has been some useful exploration, to provide us with some reference possibilities. The purpose of this paper is to study the challenges and solutions to the anti-monopoly law brought by enterprise groups through the investigation and comparison of foreign laws, and to provide some references for the development of anti-monopoly law in China. First of all, this paper discusses the economic reality and theoretical background proposed by the same economic entity. The emergence of the theory of the same economic entity is closely related to the organizational form of the enterprise group, so this paper then studies the concept and nature of the enterprise group, and studies the related concepts of the enterprise group, including parent-subsidiary company and affiliated enterprise. The holding company has carried on the discrimination. Secondly, in view of the earlier and more mature legislation of antimonopoly law in the United States, Germany and the European Union, according to the monopoly agreement, The abuse of market dominant position and the concentration of operators are the three pillar areas of anti-monopoly law to investigate the embodiment of the theory of "the same economic entity" in the legislation and judicial practice of various countries. And select a typical case to analyze how the courts of the United States use the same economic entity theory to deal with the economic reality of different cases to deal with the behavior that may limit the competitive effect among the enterprises that are members of the enterprise group. And from it, we can see the origin, development and perfection of the theory of "same economic entity" in the United States. Thirdly, based on the study of the legislative and judicial practice of the United States and Germany, this paper analyzes the formation of the core relationship of the enterprise group-the parent-subsidiary relationship, with the control of the company as the center, and the legislative and judicial practice in the United States and Germany. It lays a foundation for the proof of the standard of the same economic entity. Finally, this paper analyzes the shortcomings of antitrust legislation and practice in our country, and puts forward countermeasures to deal with the dilemma caused by the identification of antitrust subject by enterprise groups in combination with the national conditions and economic reality of our country.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.294

【相似文献】