作者:陈湘林 金杜律师事务所争议解决

【内容摘要】本文基于诉讼和战争的可比性,参照《孙子兵法》首篇“计篇”,结合中国司法程序中的具体案例,将决定诉讼案件胜负的因素总结为三类,即基本因素、通常因素和特殊因素,具体包括“经济实力”、“事实”、“法律”、“情理”、“团队配合”、“诉讼时间和时机”、“诉讼地”、“主办律师”、“律所和客户内部管理”、“社会资源”等10个。同时,就依据该10个因素对案件胜负进行综合权衡的基本规律进行了初步总结,从而为中国司法程序中诉讼策略和诉讼方案的谋定奠定基础。Continue Reading 论中国司法程序中决定诉讼案件胜负的十大因素 –结合《孙子兵法》”计篇”的思考(下)

作者:陈湘林 金杜律师事务所争议解决

【内容摘要】本文基于诉讼和战争的可比性,参照《孙子兵法》首篇“计篇”,结合中国司法程序中的具体案例,将决定诉讼案件胜负的因素总结为三类,即基本因素、通常因素和特殊因素,具体包括“经济实力”、“事实”、“法律”、“情理”、“团队配合”、“诉讼时间和时机”、“诉讼地”、“主办律师”、“律所和客户内部管理”、“社会资源”等10个。同时,就依据该10个因素对案件胜负进行综合权衡的基本规律进行了初步总结,从而为中国司法程序中诉讼策略和诉讼方案的谋定奠定基础。Continue Reading 论中国司法程序中决定诉讼案件胜负的十大因素–结合《孙子兵法》”计篇”的思考(上)

By Susan Ning, Huang Jing and Yin Ranran

On January 26, 2010, three GPS operators filed a complaint to the Guangdong Administration for Industry and Commerce ("Guangdong AIC") claiming that the municipal government of Heyuan city, Guangdong province ("Heyuan Government") abused its administrative power in the course of promoting the global positioning system ("GPS") for automobiles and eliminated and restricted competition in this industry.  After investigation, the Guangdong AIC officially proposed to the Guangdong Government asking for rectification of Heyuan Government’s abusive conducts.

According to news reports, after receiving the complaint, the Guangdong AIC initiated investigations and identified the following facts:
 
 Continue Reading First Enforcement Action under Anti-Monopoly Law against Administrative Monopoly

By Susan Ning, Liu Jia and Yin Ranran
The QQ / 360 battle broken out towards the end of 2010 (see our article entitled "The QQ / 360 Disputes – Who, What, Where, When and Preliminary Antitrust Analysis") has stirred lasting and heated discussions about anti-monopoly issues in the emerging Internet industry in China. 
 

About one month ago, Renmin University of China organized the thirteenth Anti-Monopoly Law Summit Forum, which was focused on discussion of fair competition in the Internet industry of China and protection of netizens’ interests.  Officials from various government agencies, such as the Law Committee of the National People’s Congress, Legislative Affairs of the State Council, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology ("MIIT"), the State of Administration for Industry and Commerce ("SAIC’), the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Development and Reform Commission, as well as judges from the Supreme People’s Court participated in the forum..Continue Reading Potential Monopoly In China’s Internet Industry Caught Attention of Chinese Competition Authorities

Susan Ning and Yin Ranran

Recently, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) announced that its Anti-monopoly Bureau is to put up a signboard for the "Office of State Council’s Anti-Monopoly Commission (AMC)".  According to Mr. Yao Jian, a spokesman for MOFCOM, the State Council has approved the formal establishment of the AMC Office (even though the AMC Office has been operational within MOFCOM since the enactment of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) in 2008).  

As the third anniversary of the AML draws near, Mr. Yao expects that this move will further enhance effective enforcement of the AML and the coordination among the various ministries under the AMC.Continue Reading Formal Establishment of Anti-Monopoly Commission Office within MOFCOM Approved

By Susan Ning, Liu Jia and Angie Ng

The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) has co-organised a conference focusing on price related monopoly agreements with the European Commission Directorate-General for Competition (DG Competition).  The conference took place from 1 to 2 June 2011.

Antitrust authorities from the following jurisdictions attended this conference: the European Union, the United States of America, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Australia, Greece.  From China, officials from several government agencies attended the conference, including officials from: the Law Committee of the National People’s Congress, the Supreme People’s Court, Legislative Affairs of the State Council, the NDRC, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Commerce, the State of Administration of Industry and Commerce, and pricing authorities based in Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai.  Other attendees include representatives from China Consumers’ Association, China Cleaning Industry Association and academics.Continue Reading NDRC and EU’s DG Competition organize conference on price-related monopoly agreements

By Susan Ning, Chai Zhifeng and Angie Ng

On June 2, 2011, Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) publicly announced the first conditional merger clearance in 2011. At its [2011] No. 33 Announcement, MOFCOM cleared Uralkali’s proposed acquisition of Silvinit (the Parties) (both potash producers based in Russia) with conditions.  This is the 7th conditional merger clearance since the enactment of the Anti-monopoly Law (AML) in 2008.   MOFCOM is obliged by statute to publish conditional clearances. 

The following are the salient points to note vis-à-vis this conditional clearance:Continue Reading The Russian Potash Deal – first conditional clearance of 2011

作者:张保生 金杜律师事务所争议解决组合伙人

2005年修订的《中华人民共和国公司法》(1)(下称“《公司法》”),对我国公司法律制度作出较大调整和完善,增加了公司纠纷的可诉性。但由于《公司法》的一些规定过于概括性、原则性甚至宣示性,司法实践中对公司诉讼案件同案不同判的现象比较常见。为解决《公司法》理解和适用的统一问题,指导司法实践和公司相关主体的商事活动,最高人民法院此前先后对《公司法》做出两个司法解释(2),重点明确《公司法》适用的一些基本原则和公司解散、清算问题。2011年2月16日,最高人民法院颁布《关于适用<中华人民共和国公司法>若干问题的规定(三)》(下称“司法解释(三)”),对公司成立前债务承担、出资和股权确认等实践中争议较大的问题作出解释。本文试从实务角度对司法解释(三)进行解读。Continue Reading 《最高人民法院关于适用若干问题的规定(三)》实务解读

By: Susan Ning, Angie Ng and Shan Lining

Last week (between 26 to 27 May 2011), it was reported in the press that Unilever has raised the prices of specific products (including Lux and Hazeline branded shampoos and shower gels) by 10% in some cities including Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou (Unilever’s price increases).  This was touted as a surprising move given that Unilever was recently fined by the price authority, the National Development Reform Commission (NDRC) in relation to conduct to do with its proposed price increases just earlier in the month (see below for more details to do with this fine) (Unilever’s price signaling conduct).

This article outlines details to do with Unilever’s price signaling conduct and subsequent price increases and examines whether or to what extent such conduct would be considered in breach of the Price Law and the Anti-Monopoly Law in China.Continue Reading Price signaling and price hikes – a breach of the Price Law or Anti-Monopoly Law?

By: Susan Ning, Shan Lining and Angie Ng

On 6 May 2011, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) announced that a manufacturer of household and personal care products (the Manufacturer) has been fined a total of RMB2 million for breaching the Price Law.  The NDRC also appeared to have made some Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) references in relation to this case.Continue Reading Price hikes and price signaling