Johnson & Johnson Medical

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

作者:刘成  贺墨亭 俞珍珍   金杜律师事务所并购

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