In a landmark ruling on Friday, the Beijing High People’s Court declared Chinese e-commerce giant JD.com victorious in an antitrust lawsuit against its main rival, Alibaba Group Holding. The court ordered Alibaba to pay 1 billion yuan (US$141 million) in damages, marking a significant turn in the ongoing battle between the two tech giants.
The legal saga unfolded over more than two years, stemming from an antitrust investigation initiated in December 2020 against Alibaba for alleged monopolistic practices. The investigation led to a record 18.2 billion yuan fine imposed on Alibaba by market regulators in April 2021. The recent ruling builds upon this, with the Beijing High People’s Court determining that Alibaba had “abused its market dominance” through the monopolistic tactic known as “picking one from two.”
The controversial practice, whereby online merchants are compelled to choose a single platform as their exclusive distribution channel, had been prevalent in China’s e-commerce market for years. JD.com argued that such tactics hinder market competition and adversely affect the rights of brands, merchants, and consumers. The court’s statement, released on the same day as the ruling, supported JD.com’s claim, asserting that Alibaba’s actions caused damage to JD.com’s business.
Read more: Chinese Watchdog Says Alibaba, Tencent Have Submitted App Algorithm
JD.com, China’s second-largest e-commerce player, initially filed the lawsuit in 2017, approximately two years after officially complaining to China’s State Administration for Industry and Commerce against Alibaba for unfair competition. The State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) conducted a months-long inquiry into Alibaba’s practices, concluding in April 2021 with the hefty fine and a mandate for Alibaba to rectify its misconduct.
Alibaba, which owns the South China Morning Post, responded to the court’s decision by stating that it had been informed of the judgment and respects the ruling. The legal clash between JD.com and Alibaba takes place against the backdrop of an intensifying rivalry in China’s e-commerce market, where both companies are also contending with newer challengers like budget online retailer Pinduoduo and live-streaming shopping platform Douyin, owned by TikTok parent ByteDance.
JD.com welcomed the court’s ruling, emphasizing its commitment to fostering fair competition in the market and advocating against monopolistic practices that hinder the growth of brands, merchants, and the overall e-commerce ecosystem in China.
Source: SCMP
Featured News
T-Mobile’s Acquisition of Ka’ena Corporation Receives FCC Approval
Apr 26, 2024 by
CPI
UK Regulator Announces Two New Senior Executive Appointments
Apr 26, 2024 by
CPI
Paramount Global and Skydance Media Near Merger Deal, Eyeing CEO Change
Apr 26, 2024 by
CPI
BHP Unveils £31bn Mining Megamerger Proposal with Anglo American
Apr 25, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
ByteDance Prefers Shutdown Over Sale of TikTok Amid US Ban Threats
Apr 25, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI