Dennis Lu, Guofu Tan, Jul 28, 2013
Since the introduction of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law in 2008, private litigation has been increasing in the areas of monopolistic agreements and abuses of dominance. In addition, China’s Supreme People’s Court recently issued its judicial interpretation concerning the application of the law in order to offer some guidance in resolving private disputes. The purpose of this paper is to explain how competition economics can help to provide evidence in these private litigations. We discuss how the Anti-Monopoly Law and the judicial interpretation seem to take a rule of reason approach, as well as what roles economic analyses and economists may play in related litigation. We describe the economic evidence being used and accepted in recent Chinese cases that have reached the Chinese courts of appeals and further provide our views on what other evidence could have been offered in these cases.
Featured News
Warren Questions McDonald’s CEO Over AI Pricing
Nov 3, 2026 by
CPI
Intesa CEO Confident of Antitrust Clearance for €34 Billion Monte dei Paschi Bid
Nov 3, 2026 by
CPI
EU Clears JD.com’s $2.5 Billion Ceconomy Takeover With Conditions on Chinese Subsidies
Nov 3, 2026 by
CPI
Amazon Faces Antitrust Class Action Involving 10 Million Consumers
Nov 3, 2026 by
CPI
McDonald’s Hires White & Case to Defend Against AI Price-Fixing Suits
Nov 3, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Exclusive Dealing
Oct 25, 2026 by
CPI
Exclusive Dealing Without Exclusivity: Screening Contracts, Loyalty Rebates, and the Limits of Antitrust Tests
Oct 25, 2026 by
David Martimort & Jérôme Pouyet
When Competition for Exclusivity Raises Prices: Rebates, Pricing Rules, and the Insulin Puzzle
Oct 25, 2026 by
Daniel P. O’Brien & Greg Shaffer
Why Leaving the Door Open Can Be (Much) Worse Than Closing It: Share-Based Requirements, Buyer-Specific Costs, and Foreclosure
Oct 25, 2026 by
Zhijun Chen & Greg Shaffer
Antitrust Chronicle® – EU Merger Guidelines
Oct 19, 2026 by
CPI