英语助手母语润色网
查找母语润色产品
立即注册
下单注意事项

简论知识产权概念化之否定与特征之重构论文|行业论文中英文论文|英语助手官网

发表时间:2015-11-4  来源:www.yingyuzhushou.com  作者:yingyuzhushou.com  浏览次数:1907  
字体大小: 【小】 【中】 【大】
论文摘要 本文通过对经营者集中的概念进行界定,分析经营者集中的表现形式。进而对反垄断法在经营者集中申报的标准、审查的法律规制上进行论证,发现其中的不足并提出完善的建议从而使法律规制能够更好地发挥其维护市场竞争的作用。
  论文关键词 经营者集中 申报 审查
  一、引言
  经营者集中是各国经济活动中存在的一种现象,它是经营者开拓市场或是进入新市场,增强自身经济实力的一种方式。应该说在一定程度上经营者集中能够改善一定的经济效益,提高作为经营者在市场上的竞争力。但是由于一定的集中占据的市场支配地位,使得一些阻碍公平竞争和损害消费者合法权益的现象出现。因此,关于经营者集中成为世界各国法律规制的重要对象,在我国,经营者集中与垄断协议、滥用市场支配地位一同成为《反垄断法》规制的重要内容。
  二、经营者集中的概念
  一般来说,“经营者集中”是指以获得企业的控制权或从企业获得重大经济利益为目的,通过合并、股份购买、资产购买、经营协议等方式实施的对竞争构成重大影响的行为。然而,由于各国不同的经济发展水平和竞争政策,关于这一概念的界定是存在差异的。
  美国《克莱顿法》第7条规定:“从事商业或从事影响商业活动的任何人,不能直接间接占有其他从事商业或影响商业活动的一人的全部或部分股票或其它资本份额。联邦贸易委员会管辖权下的任何人,不能占有其它从事商业或影响商业活动的人的全部或一部分资产,如果该占有实质上减少竞争或旨在形成垄断。”
  欧盟《关于规制企业间集中行为的理事会规则》第3条将经营者集中界定为:“两个或两个以上的从前独立的企业实施的合并行为;或者至少已经支配了一个企业的一个或一个以上的个人或企业,通过有价证券或资产的购入、契约或其他任何方式,获得对其他的一个或一个以上企业的全部或部分的直接或间接的支配权的行为。”
  在臺湾地区的“公平交易法”的第3条规定:“本法所称结合,谓事业有下列情形之一者而言:(1)与他事业合并者;(2)持有或取得他事业之股份或出资额,达到他事业有表决权股份或资本总额三分之一以上者;(3)受让或承租他事业全部或主要部分之营业或财产;(4)与他事业经常共同经营或受他事业委托经营者;(5)直接或间接控制他事业之业务或人事任免者。”
  我国《反垄断法》的实施,明确规定了有关经营者集中的相关界定。《反垄断法》第20条规定:经营者集中是指下列情形:(1)经营者合并;(2)经营者通过取得股权或者资产的方式取得对其他经营者的控制权;(3)经营者通过合同等方式取得对其他经营者的控制权或者能够对其他经营者施加决定性影响。应该说,从各国对经营者集中的界定来看,都可以得出经营者集中,无论以什麽样的方式存在和表现,都是各自经济实力的一种集中,在市场完全公平竞争的前提下,这样的经济实力聚集在超越合法范围之时,势必受到各国反垄断法规制的重要对象。
  三、经营者集中的具体表现形式
  根据我国《反垄断法》的规定,经营者集中的具体情形表现为如下:
  (一)经营者合并
  “经营者合并”是指两个或两个以上的企业通过订立合并协议,合并为一个企业的法律行为。经营者的合并有两种方式,一是吸收合并,即存续合并,它是指两个或两个以上的企业合并时,其中一个或一个以上的企业并入另一家企业的法律行为;二是新设合并,是指两个或两个以上的企业组合成为一个新企业的法律行为,其原有两个企业在存在。
  (二)经营者通过取得股权或者资产的方式取得对其他经营者的控制权
  这一形式的经营者集中又两种情形,一是一个企业通过购买、置换等方式取的另一个企业的股权,该企业成为另一个企业或几个企业的控股股东并取得对其他经营者的控制权;另一情形是一个企业通过购买、置换、抵押等方式取得另一个或几个企业的资产,该企业成为另一个或几个企业的控股股东或是及控制人。
  (三)经营者通过合同等方式取得对其他经营者的控制权或者能够对其他经营者施加决定性影响
  关于这一点的经营者的控制权和施加的决定性影响,应该厘清控股股东和实际控制人这两个概念。控股股东是指,出资额占有限责任公司资本总额50%以上或者其持有的股份占股份有限公司股本总额50%以上的股东。而实际控制人则是指,虽然不是公司的股东但通过一定的投资关系、协议等其他原因,能够实际控制公司行为的人。反垄断法对于控制权和对经营者施加决定性影响的规定是考虑到控股股东与实际控制人的概念差异,从而来规制通过合同方式形成的经营者集中。
  四、《反垄断法》规制的不足与完善
  我国《反垄断法》的出臺,对经营者集中的情况在法律上做出了明确的规定,在确定经营者集中的三种表现形式下,对经营者集中的申报、审查都做出相关规定。根据《反垄断法》第21条规定:“经营者集中达到国务院规定的申报标准的,经营者应当事先向国务院反垄断执法机构申报,未申报的不得实施集中。”第23条规定:“经营者向国务院反垄断执法机构申报集中,应当提交下列文件、资料:申报书;集中对相关市场竞争状况影响的说明;集中协议;参与集中的经营者经会计师事务所审计的上一会计年度财务会计报告;国务院反垄断执法机构规定的其他文件、资料。申报书应当载明参与集中的经营者的名称、住所、经营范围、预定实施集中的日期和国务院反垄断执法机构规定的其他事项。”第27条还规定了审查经营者集中的实质性标准,主要涉及参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力;相关市场的市场集中度;经营者集中对市场进入、技术进步的影响;经营者集中对消费者和其他有关经营者的影响;经营者集中对国民经济发展的影响;国务院反垄断执法机构认为应当考虑的影响市场竞争的其他因素。另外,关于审查,《反垄断法》第25条规定:“国务院反垄断执法机构应当自收到经营者提交的符合本法第二十三条规定的文件、资料之日起三十日内,对申报的经营者集中进行初步审查,作出是否实施进一步审查的决定,并书面通知经营者。国务院反垄断执法机构作出决定前,经营者不得实施集中。国务院反垄断执法机构作出不实施进一步审查的决定或者逾期未作出决定的,经营者可以实施集中。”第26条规定:“国务院反垄断执法机构决定实施进一步审查的,应当自决定之日起九十日内审查完毕,作出是否禁止经营者集中的决定,并书面通知经营者。作出禁止经营者集中的决定,应当说明理由。审查期间,经营者不得实施集中。”对于这一条还规定必要情况下反垄断执法机构可以延长第二阶段审查时限,但延长的期限最长不超过60日。

  从我国反垄断法对经营者集中的申报和审批来看,在一定程度上要求达到一定程度的企业并购进行申报,在审查上也具有灵活性等优点,但在具体的执行中是仍然存在不足的,具体来说:
  (一)申报标准的规定不足
  《反垄断法》仅在21条中规定,经营者集中达到国务院规定的申报标准的,应当事先向国务院反垄断执法机构申报,但却没有规定具体的申报标准。虽然在《国务院关于经营者集中申报的规定》中明确了申报标准,但从具体实践及各国经验来看,关于申报企业上一年度在全球和中国境内的营业额的规定过低。因此,从反垄断法禁止的对市场竞争有严重损害的合并来看,应调整经营者集中申报的最低限度。
  (二)关于审查的完善
  《反垄断法》对于经营者集中申报的审查规定6项审查的标准,但是其中的一些标准存在不确定性,第4、5项规定的“经营者集中对消费者和其他有关经营者的影响以及经营者集中对国民经济发展的影响”存在操作上的问题,应该说反垄断法的目的在于保证维护公平的市场竞争和对消费者利益的保护。而对于其他有关经营者及国民经济的发展不应列为其审查标准及效率中的考虑因素,在这一点上应做出相应的法律规制的调整。另外对于相关市场、市场集中度、产品市场等概念的界定不明确,建议应在法律中予以相关明确界定。当然,对于《反垄断法》的实施,这是一个重要环节,在《国务院关于经营者集中申报的规定》出臺的同时,在操作上我们仍然需要完整的制定、完善具体配套的操作细则来保障《反垄断法》对垄断行为的有效规制。
  五、经营者集中审查的豁免
  在反垄断法中规定的适用豁免是指,在某些特定领域中,尽管存在限制竞争或联合等行为,但法律允许一定的垄断状态或垄断行为存在的一种制度。这一制度体现在我国《反垄断法》对经营者集中的规定中则是:“经营者能够证明该集中对竞争产生的有利影响明显大于不利影响,或者符合社会公共利益的,国务院反垄断执法机构可以作出对经营者集中不予禁止的决定。”应该说第28条关于经营者集中审查的豁免是具有进步性和实践意义的。我们在借鉴国外的相关经验的同时,审查的豁免体现了对社会公共利益的追求,使在产业政策与竞争政策的执行上能找到一个平衡点,从而维护了国家市场经济秩序的有序发展。
  六、国家安全性审查及法律责任
  当然,对于《反垄断法》关于经营者集中的规制中,还存在涉及外资并购和法律责任的相关规定。我国《反垄断法》第31条规定:“对外资并购境内企业或者以其他方式参与经营者集中,涉及国家安全的,除依照本法规定进行经营者集中审查外,还应当按照国家有关规定进行国家安全审查。”第48条规定:“经营者违反本法规定实施集中的,由国务院反垄断执法机构责令停止实施集中、限期处分股份或者资产、限期转让营业以及采取其他必要措施恢復到集中前的状态,可以处五十万元以下的罚款。”关于涉及外资并购的国家安全性审查,因其相关的国家经济安全性问题,因此在审查机关上应该具备相应的审查机构和审查程序。最后,对于法律责任的规定则是应对经营者集中的重要法律救济,同时也使得反垄断法对违法行为的规制具有可操作性。
  七、结语
  经营者集中作为市场经济条件下企业间相互竞争优胜劣汰的一种形式,他对于企业规模的扩大,资源的优化配置都具有一定积极的作用。然而,在超出公平竞争范围,占据市场支配地位情况下的经营者集中又会造成对竞争的限制和排斥,因此,需要完善相应的法律,使其对经营者集中进行正确地规制,从而保障公平的市场竞争。

译文;

Abstract Based on the concept of concentration of business operators to define, analyze business concentration manifestations. Turn on the anti-monopoly law in the concentration of business operators reporting standards, review of legal regulation on the demonstration, which was found deficiencies and make recommendations to improve the legal regulation can better play its role in maintaining competition in the market.

Paper Keywords concentration of business operators declare Review
I. Introduction
Business concentration of economic activity in each country there is a phenomenon, which is the operator to develop new markets or enter new markets, enhance its economic strength in a way. It should be said to some extent, a certain concentration of business operators can improve economic efficiency, increase as the operator's competitiveness in the market. However, due to the concentration of certain occupied a dominant market position, making some hinder fair competition and harm consumers' legitimate rights and interests of the phenomenon. Therefore, on the concentration of business operators become the world an important object of legal regulation, in our country, business concentration and monopoly agreements, abuse of dominant market position with a 'antitrust' regulation of important content.
Second, the concept of concentration of business operators
In general, the 'concentration of undertakings' means to get control of the business or from the enterprise for the purpose of obtaining significant economic benefits, through mergers, share purchase, asset purchase, the implementation of operating agreements, etc. have a significant impact on the competitive behavior. However, due to the different economic development levels and competition policy, with regard to the definition of this concept is the existence of differences.  
United States, 'Clayton Law' Article 7 states: 'engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce who are not directly engaged in commercial or indirect possession of other commercial activities affecting all or part of a person's stock or other share capital and the Federal Trade Commission under the jurisdiction of any person not engaged in commercial or affect the possession of other people's business activities all or part of the assets, if the possession of substantially lessen competition or to create a monopoly. ' 
EU's 'focus on the regulation of the behavior of enterprises Council Regulation' on page 3 the concentration of business operators is defined as: 'Two or more previously independent enterprises merge behavior; or at least have a business dominated one or one or more individuals or enterprises, through the purchase of securities or assets, contracts or any other means to get on the other one or more of all or part of the direct or indirect control over the behavior. ' 
In Taiwan, 'fair trade', Section 3 states: 'this law combined enterprise that one of the purposes of the following circumstances: (1) those who combined with his career; (2) holds or acquires cause of the shares or capital contributions, to achieve his career voting shares or more than one-third of the total capital; (3) the transferee or lessee of his career in whole or in substantial part of the business or property; (4) with his career regular joint operation or by those entrusted with the operation of his career; (5) directly or indirectly controls the business or his career appointments and dismissals are. ' 
China's 'anti-monopoly law,' the implementation of clearly defined focus on the relevant operators defined. 'Antitrust Law' Article 20 provides that: concentration of business operators refers to the following situations: (a) merger of business operators; (2) the operator through the acquisition of the equity or assets obtains control over the other operators; (3) Operating such as those obtained by contract to other operators or control over other operators able to exert a decisive influence. It should be said, from the national focus on the definition of the operator point of view, can be derived concentration of business operators, no matter what way the presence and performance are the respective strength of a centralized economy, fair competition in the market is completely under the premise Such economic strength gathered at the time beyond the legitimate scope, it is bound by the national antitrust regulation is important object.
Third, the concentration of business operators specific forms
According to China's 'anti-monopoly law,' the provisions of the specific circumstances of business concentration expressed as follows: 
(A) merger of undertakings' merger of undertakings 'means two or more enterprises by entering into the merger agreement, the combined company as a legal act. Operators merge in two ways, one merger, namely the existence of merger, it refers to two or more of the business combination, one or more of the companies incorporated in another enterprise legal acts; Second new merger refers to two or more enterprises combined into a new corporate legal act, the original two companies exist. 

(Two) the operator through the acquisition of the equity or assets to other operators to obtain control over this form of business concentration and two cases, one is a business through the purchase, replacement and other methods to take stake in another enterprise, another enterprise or the enterprise to become the controlling shareholder of several companies and obtains control over the other operators; Another scenario is an enterprise through the purchase, exchange, mortgage and other ways to obtain one or several other corporate assets, the firm had become one or more other companies or controlling shareholder and controlling person.  
(Three) operators through contracts obtained for control over other business operators or other operators to be able to exert a decisive influence on this point the operator's control and exert a decisive influence, should clarify the controlling shareholder and actual controller of this two concepts. Controlling shareholder refers to a limited liability company's capital investment accounted for over 50% of the total shares held by or representing more than 50% of the total share capital Corporation shareholders. The actual control refers to, though not the company's shareholders, but through certain investment relations, agreements and other reasons, can actually control the acts of the company. For the control of the anti-monopoly law and decisive influence on the operators is given to the provisions of the controlling shareholder and actual controller conceptual differences, thus to regulate the formation of by contract operators concentrated.
Fourth, the 'anti-monopoly law,' the lack of regulation and improvement
China's 'anti-monopoly law,' The introduction of the operator focus on the situation in law made a clear provision, in determining the concentration of business operators in three forms, the report focused on the operators to review the relevant provisions are made . According to 'anti-monopoly law,' Article 21 stipulates: 'The State Council required the operator to achieve centralized reporting standards, operators should advance to the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies reporting, undeclared shall implement centralized.' Article 23 states: 'Operating those with the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies to notify a concentration shall submit the following documents and materials: declarations; focused on the effects of competition in the relevant market description; centralized agreements; participating undertakings are audited by accounting firms on a fiscal year financial reports; antimonopoly law enforcement agencies of the other documents and materials declaration shall contain the operators involved in the concentration of the name, residence, business scope, the implementation of centralized scheduled date and antitrust enforcement authority under the State Council and other matters. 'Section 27 also provides for a review of the substantive standard concentration of business operators, mainly involving the participating undertakings in the relevant market, the market share of its control over the market; relevant market concentration; operators focused on market access, technology progressive impact; operators focused on consumers and other operators concerned the impact; operators focused on the impact of national economic development; antimonopoly law enforcement agencies that should be taken into account other factors that affect competition in the market. In addition, on the review of 'anti-monopoly law,' Article 25 stipulates: 'The State Council anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies shall receive the operators submitted conform to the provisions of Article 23 of the documents and information within thirty days from the date of declared concentration of business operators conduct a preliminary review and make a decision whether to implement further review, and notify operators of the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies before making a decision, the operator shall implement a centralized the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies made the decision not to implement further review or fails to make a decision, the operator can implement centralized. 'Article 26 stipulates:' The State Council decided to implement the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies to further review, it shall decide within ninety days from the date of completion of the review to decide whether to prohibit the concentration of decision and notify operators. making the decision to prohibit the concentration, it shall explain the reasons. the review period, the operator shall implement a centralized. 'For this one also provides the necessary circumstances AMEA second phase of the review period may be extended, but the extension of the maximum period of 60 days.

From our antitrust laws focus on the operators reporting and approval of view, to a certain extent required to achieve a certain degree of corporate mergers and acquisitions reporting, the review also has the flexibility and other advantages, but in the specific implementation is still inadequate , and in particular: 
(A) the provisions of inadequate reporting standards 'anti-monopoly law,' only 21 stipulates that the concentration of undertakings reporting standards achieved by the State Council, it shall advance to the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies reported, but no specific reporting standards. Although the 'State Council on the concentration of business operators reporting requirements' clearly the reporting standards, but the specific practice and international experience, the reporting enterprise in the world and the previous year's turnover in China requirement is too low. Therefore, from the competition on the market prohibited by antitrust serious damage together, declared concentration of business operators should be adjusted to the minimum. 

(Two) on the review of the perfect 'anti-monopoly law' For the review of business concentration reporting requirements 6 standard of review, but some of the standard uncertainty, paragraph 4 and 5 of the 'concentration of undertakings for consumers and other relevant operators as well as operators focus on the impact of national economic development 'operational problems exist, it should be said that the purpose of antitrust law is to ensure fair market competition and safeguarding the interests of consumers protection. As for the other relevant operators and national economic development should not be classified in its review criteria and efficiency considerations, at this point should be to make the appropriate adjustment of legal regulation. In addition to the relevant market, market concentration, product market definition is not clear concepts, proposals should be associated in the law clearly defined. Of course, the 'anti-monopoly law,' the implementation, which is an important link in the 'State Council on the concentration of business operators reporting requirements' introduced at the same time, in operation, we still need to complete the development, improve the matching of specific rules for the operation to protect 'Antitrust Law' for the effective regulation of monopolistic behavior.
Fifth, business concentration review exemptions
Specified in an applicable exemption from antitrust law is, in some specific areas, despite restricting competition or in combination and other acts, but the law allows a certain degree of monopoly status, or the existence of a system of monopolistic behavior. This system is reflected in China's 'anti-monopoly law,' focused on the requirements of the operators is: 'operator can prove that the concentration on competition significantly greater than the favorable impact of adverse effects, or public interests, the State Council anti-monopoly law enforcement institutions can be made on business decision not to prohibit the concentration. 'Section 28 should be said about the concentration of business operators review the exemption is a progressive and practical significance. We draw on relevant experience abroad, while reviewing the exemption reflects the pursuit of the public interest, so that in the industrial policy and competition policy implementation can be found on a balance, so as to maintain the state of the orderly development of the market economic order.
Six, national security review and Liability
Of course, the 'anti-monopoly law' On the regulation of business concentration, there is also involved in foreign acquisitions and legal liability regulations. China's 'anti-monopoly law,' Article 31 provides that: 'foreign acquisition of domestic enterprises, or otherwise participate in the concentration of business operators, involving national security, except in accordance with this Law business concentration review, should also be in accordance with relevant state regulations national security review. 'Article 48 stipulates:' operator implementation of centralized violation of this law, the State Council anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies ordered to stop the implementation of centralized, the deadline to dispose of shares or assets, the deadline for transferring the business and to take other necessary measures to recover before the concentration state, shall be liable to a fine of 500,000 yuan. 'on foreign mergers and acquisitions involving national security review, because the relevant national economic security issues, and therefore should have the appropriate reviewing authority on the review body and the review process. Finally, for legal liability provisions deal with business concentration is an important legal remedies, but also makes for violations of antitrust regulation operability.
VII Conclusion
Concentration of business operators as a market economy under the conditions of competition between enterprises as a form of survival of the fittest, he for the expansion of business scale, optimize resource allocation have some positive effect. However, beyond the scope of fair competition, a dominant position in case of concentration of undertakings would cause a restriction of competition and exclusion, therefore, need to improve relevant laws, making the operator to focus on proper regulation, in order to protect fair competition in the market.

文章评论
发表评论:(匿名发表无需登录,已登录用户可直接发表。) 登录状态: 未登录,点击登录

地址:上海徐汇区田林东路55号汇阳广场20楼C23和C22室(英文论文润色服务) 热线电话:400-0871-070

旗下母公司:上海译境翻译服务有限公司   联系电话:021-6131 4984

                            英语助手英文论文润色官方网版权所有沪ICP备14046471号-1 © 2007-2027 E-ging All Rights Reserved.

                           咨询电话:137 6474 0063      咨询QQ:229632732          服务邮箱:info@e-ging.xyz