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, 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

By Susan Ning, Huang Jing and Angie Ng

 

We understand from press reports that the China Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) has complained that a large automobile manufacturer has allegedly been imposing unreasonable restraints on its distributors, including determining a minimum resale price and allocating territory.  There has been some suggestion in the press that the conduct allegedly undertaken by the automobile manufacturer is in breach of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML).

 

This article identifies the AML provision governing such vertical restraints; and also outlines how certain vertical restraints in relation to the motor industry are being dealt with in Europe.Continue Reading Complaint re resale price maintenance in the automobile industry

By Susan Ning, Yin Ranran, and Angie Ng

Recently, there has been a flurry of press reports on the proposed price increases by several major manufacturers of household and personal care products, including multinationals such as Procter & Gamble and Unilever, as well as domestic manufacturers such as "Liby" and "Nice".  Pursuant to the press reports, all four manufacturers mentioned above have separately announced that the retail prices for their respective brands of washing agents (including washing powders, soaps and shampoos) will increase by as much as 10% commencing from early April 2011.  Commentators have said that this is the largest price hike that they have seen in relation to the household and personal care products industry, in the past 3 years. Continue Reading Price Hikes for Washing Powders, Soaps and Shampoos Expected in April

By: Susan Ning, Liu Jia and Yin Ranran

Recently, the Jiangsu Administration for Industry & Commerce ("Jiangsu AIC") issued sanctions against the Concrete Committee of the Construction Materials and Construction Machinery Industry Association of Lianyungang City ("Association") and 16 concrete manufacturers for breach of the Anti-Monopoly Law, by way of having entered into a monopoly agreement.  

This is the first publicly released enforcement decision by the SAIC (which delegated power onto the AIC) in respect of the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML), since the enactment of the AML in August 20081

The State Administration for Industry & Commerce ("SAIC") possesses the jurisdiction to govern and enforce non-price prohibitions in respect of the AML. And, according to the Article 10 of the AML and the Article 2 of the Procedural Rules by Administration of Industry and Commerce regarding Investigation and Handling of Cases relating to Monopoly Agreement and Abuse of Dominant Market Position, where necessary, SAIC may delegate to relevant AIC of a province, an autonomous region, or a municipality ("Provincial AIC") the authority of anti-monopoly law enforcement with regard to monopoly agreement and abuse of dominant market position.

 Continue Reading First Public Enforcement Decision by SAIC against concrete manufacturers

ByYuan Min, Wang Jianzhao , and Kirby Carder, King & Wood Insurance Department, Beijing

The State Council has ordered the Foreign Enterprise Representative Institution Registration and Administration Regulations (Order of State Council No. 584) (《外国企业常驻代表机构登记管理条例》) to come into force on March 1st, 2011. This new regulation alters the rules for a foreign insurance institution to register a representative office in China, and it regulates the activities that a foreign insurance institution representative office can engage in once it is properly registered.Continue Reading China Implements New Rules for Registering Foreign Representative Offices

A Chinese company’s top executive is usually the company’s legal representative, and he or she is legally entrusted with the company seal, which is the company’s official symbol. The company seal provides the legal capacity to make and execute agreements, provide guarantees, transfer assets, and legally bind the company. When a legal representative is replaced, the displaced legal representative must return the company seal to the company so that the new legal representative can represent the company. However, if the displaced legal representative refuses to return the seal, the company could be liable for all the agreements that the former legal representative binds the company to. In other words, even if the articles of association can be used to remove an executive it does not necessarily mean that the foreign investors have been able to regain control of the company in practice. Therefore, retrieving the terminated legal representative’s unlawfully held company seal is an important step toward the foreign investors recapturing control of the company.

By Zhang Shouzhi, Xu Xiaodan and Li Xiang, King & Wood’s Cross-Border Dispute Resolution Practice, BeijingContinue Reading Battle for the Company Seal