作者：宁宣凤 彭荷月 金杜律师事务所反垄断组

自《中华人民共和国反垄断法》（“《反垄断法》”）实施以来，作为反垄断执法机构的国家工商行政管理总局（“国家工商总局”）和国家发展和改革委员会（“国家发改委”）已经分别在其职权范围内就一些经营者涉嫌垄断的行为进行了调查，并对部分行为实施了处罚。请参见”First Public Enforcement Decision by SAIC against concrete manufacturers（国家工商总局首个公开处罚决定针对混凝土生产企业）”、”Earlier Rumor Confirmed: China Telecom and China Unicom under Antitrust Investigation（早前传闻被确认——中国电信和中国联通接受反垄断调查）”、”NDRC Fined Two Pharmaceutical Companies for Abusive Conducts（国家发改委对两家制药公司垄断行为进行处罚）”以及”Price Related Breaches of the AML and the Price Law – How Many Public Cases Have There Been?（与价格有关的垄断行为以及价格法——目前有多少公开案例？）”等相关文章。

根据《反垄断法》第46条和第47条，如果经营者达成并实施垄断协议，或滥用市场支配地位，反垄断执法机构可以作出以下处罚决定：
 

Continue Reading 反垄断处罚行政复议常见问题解答

By Susan Ning and Kate Peng

Since the enactment of the China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (“AML“), the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (“SAIC“) and the National Development and Reform Commission (“NDRC“) have investigated into a number of cases that raise competition concerns and have imposed penalties on some companies within their respective authorities.  Please see our previously published articles including “First Public Enforcement Decision by SAIC against concrete manufacturers“, “Earlier Rumor Confirmed: China Telecom and China Unicom under Antitrust Investigation“, “NDRC Fined Two Pharmaceutical Companies for Abusive Conducts“, “Price Related Breaches of the AML and the Price Law -How Many Public Cases Have There Been?“, etc.

According to Article 46 and 47 of the AML, if a business operator reaches and executes a monopoly agreement or abuses its dominant market position, the anti-monopoly enforcement agencies can impose the following penalties:

Continue Reading FAQs about Administrative Review of Antitrust Enforcement Decision

By Susan Ning and Huang Jing

On June 6, 2012, the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM“) promulgates the new merger filing form (the “New Form“).  Filings submitted after July 7, 2012 should use this New Form.  The New Form is more than just a formal change.  MOFCOM has condensed its three and a half years of experience since the first filing form of January 2009 into the new form.  It contains requests for additional information and guidelines on some substantive issues of merger filling.

 The definition of “operator to the concentration”

Before the promulgation of the New Form, the definition of an “operator to the concentration” is one of the major unsolved issues related to merger control review in China.  Continue Reading MOFCOM New Merger Filing Form-Clarification on Major Filing Issues

By Susan Ning and Hazel Yin

On June 15, 2012, the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) approved the acquisition of Goodrich Corporation (“Goodrich”) by United Technologies Corporation (“UTC”) subject to the divestment of the electronic systems business of Goodrich.  Both companies are headquartered in the United States and active in the production and sale of aviation equipment.  This marks the fourth conditional clearance issued by MOFCOM in the first half of 2012 and the only case where the core remedies are structural.

 Review Process.  MOFCOM received the notification on December 12, 2011 and officially accepted it on February 6, 2012.  A Phase 2 investigation was opened on March 2 and extended on May 31, which was set to expire on July 30.  Continue Reading MOFCOM Approves UTC’s Acquisition of Goodrich with Divestiture Requirement

By Martyn Huckerby Jill Wong King & Wood Mallesons’ Foreign Direct Investment Group

On June 22, 2012, Hong Kong’s first cross-sector substantive competition law regime was published in the official gazette, bringing with it a new regulator ready to change business practices in the Asian region, and armed with extensive enforcement powers, including the ability to conduct dawn raids and levy significant fines for anti-competitive conduct once the changes come into force.

The Competition Ordinance will prohibit cartel conduct, abuses of market power and other forms of anti-competitive conduct, subject to the availability of a number of exemptions, including exemptions based on efficiencies, Block Exemptions and minimum turnover. Merger control will continue to be limited to the telecommunications sector. Continue Reading Hong Kong’s new competition law: get ready for the antitrust revolution

作者：张保生 程世刚  金杜律师事务所争议解决组

根据公司法的公司契约理论，公司本质是一种合同的集合，是股东之间就设立公司、分享权利和承担义务等内容所订立的协议，股东对公司的出资义务也是合同义务之一。借鉴合同法上违约行为的概念体系，根据股东违反出资义务的形式即出资瑕疵形式的不同，因出资问题引发的纠纷可分为不履行出资义务的纠纷和不适当履行出资义务的纠纷。不履行出资义务是指股东根本未出资，具体又可分为虚报注册资本纠纷、虚假出资纠纷、抽逃出资纠纷。不适当履行出资义务是指出资数额、出资时间、出资手续不符合规定或者约定，具体又分为出资不足纠纷、逾期出资纠纷、出资不当纠纷等。结合实践情况，现将各种出资问题引发的纠纷介绍如下。

1、虚报注册资本纠纷

虚报注册资本，是指出资人申请公司登记时使用虚假证明文件或者其他欺诈手段，虚报注册资本，欺骗公司登记主管部门并取得公司登记。

Continue Reading 因出资瑕疵引发的公司诉讼—-跨国公司在华公司诉讼系列（II）

By Liu Cheng  Martyn Huckerby and Yu Chenchen  King & Wood Mallesons’ M&A Group

Whether a resale price maintenance (“RPM”) provision is deemed to infringe the Anti-Monopoly Law (“AML”)[1] regardless of whether it has an impact on competition has been one of the most cloudy issues under the AML since the law came into effect in 2008. A recent decision by the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court (“Shanghai Court”) has found that for RPM to infringe the AML it must have an adverse impact on competition. While it is still too early to say if this court decision will be followed by other Chinese courts, the decision provides valuable guidance for companies when considering how the AML will apply to their distribution agreements in China.

Continue Reading Resale Price Maintenance – Not Per Se Illegal Under the AML

By Huang Tao  King & Wood Mallesons’ Dispute Resolution Group

The fast growth of China’s economy has gotten more and more foreign enterprises to invest in Mainland China. Foreign investors need to establish a local presence Chinese, for example, a representative office, a branch, a subsidiary, or a joint venture so that they can do business in China. As the business ties between China and the rest of the world strengthen, the number of China-related business disputes has been increasing.

Arbitration is one of the most favored international business transaction dispute resolution mechanisms because it is convenient, efficient, and the cross-border enforceability of arbitration awards tends to be higher than court judgments. Continue Reading The Validity of Arbitration Agreements under Chinese Law

作者：黄滔 金杜律师事务所争议解决组

近几十年来，随着中国经济的快速发展，越来越多的外国公司选择在中国大陆（“中国”）投资，投资方式包括设立代表处、分支机构、子公司、合营（合作）企业或者与中国公司建立贸易纽带。中外经济合作加强也使涉及中国因素的争议在近几十年内迅猛增加。

由于其便利、高效的特点以及裁决跨境执行力的日益增强，仲裁已成为涉外合同中最受欢迎的争议解决机制之一。尽管如此，在某些情况下，即使当事人同意将彼此之间的争议提交仲裁，由于对仲裁条款的效力存在争议，最终也只能将争议提交法院解决。另外，考虑到不同的国家及地区的法律对仲裁协议或条款的效力或执行力存在不同要求，已经及将要在中国开展业务或和与中国公司或个人进行商业往来的企业及商人应对此予以特别的关注。

Continue Reading 如何起草国际商事合同中的争议解决条款

作者：刘成  贺墨亭 俞珍珍   金杜律师事务所并购组

自从《中华人民共和国反垄断法》[1]（“《反垄断法》”）实施以来，关于“无论限定转售价格条款对竞争有无影响，均被视为违反《反垄断法》”这一问题，始终是《反垄断法》中几个最不明确的问题之一。但是近日，上海市第一中级人民法院（“上海一中院”）作出的一项判决表示，要认定限定转售价格条款违反《反垄断法》，必须证明该条款对竞争产生了不利影响。尽管目前还很难说上海一中院的这一判决能否得到中国其他法院的认可和遵循，但总的来说，这一判决对于各个公司考察《反垄断法》如何适用于其在中国的经销协议，将发挥重要的指导作用。

 案件事实和法院判决

本案的争议双方是强生（上海）医疗器材有限公司和强生（中国）医疗器材有限公司（合称“强生”）与它们的一位经销商—北京锐邦涌和科贸有限公司（“锐邦”），争议在于强生经销合同中限定最低转售价格的条款。 Continue Reading 限定转售价格–《反垄断法》下并非本身违法的情形