By Susan Ning, Ding Liang and Shan Lining, King & Wood’s Competition Group

At the end of last month, it was reported in the press (for example see an article dated 29 August published in the Legal Daily, that since the enactment of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) in 2008, at least ten antitrust private actions have been heard in the courts. 

 Private actions refer to actions being commenced by third parties who have suffered loss or damage due to an offending party’s anti-competitive conduct. In this regard, private actions work hand-in-hand with public actions (i.e. actions commenced by the antitrust or competition authority) in relation to enforcing the antitrust or competition law.

Out of these 10 cases, 9 of the cases are abuse of dominance cases; and 1 case is a cartel case.

The following is a brief description of the 10 antitrust private actions to date:

Case Name

Court

Allegation

Result

Li Fangping vs China Netcom (Beijing)

First instance: Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court;

Second instance: Beijing Higher People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in discriminatory treatment of customers, and therein abused their dominance in the fixed telephone lines industry.

First instance: The court rejected the Plaintiff’s claims (Dec. 18, 2009).

Second instance: The court upheld the first instance judgment (Jun. 9, 2010).

Tangshan Renren vs Baidu

First instance: Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court;

Second instance: Beijing Higher People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in restrictive transactions therein abusing its dominance, in the search engine services industry in China.

First instance: The court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims (Dec 2009). The Plaintiff appealed.

Second instance: Currently pending.

Zhou Ze vs. China Mobile

Beijing Second Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in discriminatory treatment of customers, and therein abused their dominance in the mobile communication service industry.

Case withdrawn and settled out of court (Oct 2009).

Beijing Sursen Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. vs. Shanda Interactive Entertainment Ltd. and Shanghai Xuanting Entertainment Co. Ltd.

First instance: Shanghai First Intermediate People’s Court;

Second instance: Shanghai Higher People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in restrictive transactions, and therein abused their dominance in the online literary arts industry.

First instance: The court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims (October 2009).

Second instance: The court upheld the first instance judgment (December 2009).

Chongqing Xibu Bankruptcy Liquidation Ltd. vs. China Construction Bank

Chongqing Fifth Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in discriminatory treatment of customers, and therein abused their dominance in the banking industry.

Case withdrawn and settled out of court (2008).

Huzhou Yiting Termite Prevention Service Co., Ltd. vs. Huzhou Termite Prevention Research Institute

First instance: Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court;

Second instance: Zhejiang Provincial Higher People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant abused their dominance in the Huzhou house and construction termite prevention industry.

First instance: The court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims (2010).

Second instance: Currently pending.

Zhongjing Zongheng Information Center vs. Baidu

Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant abused their dominance by not allowing the Plaintiff’s links to appear on the Defendant’s website.

Currently pending.

Zheng Minjie vs. Verisign China and ICANN re a to z.com

Ningbo Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in conduct amounting to refusal to deal, and therein abused their dominance in relation to an issue to do with domain names.

Currently pending.

Zheng Minjie vs. Verisign China and ICANN re 0 to 9.com

Ningbo Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in conduct amounting to refusal to deal, and therein abused their dominance in relation to an issue to do with domain names.

Currently pending.

Liu Fangrong vs. Chongqing Insurance Association

Chongqing Fifth Intermediate People’s Court

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant engaged in a price fixing cartel in relation to auto insurance premiums.

Case withdrawn (Dec 2008)