论文部分内容阅读
在法律上是否应当赋予间接购买人反垄断诉权,这一问题存在较大争议。从理论上看,赋予间接购买人反垄断诉权符合法律的矫正正义和反垄断法维护消费者权益的制度目的,契合反垄断法的威慑和补偿功能及“诉之利益”的当事人适格理论;从实践上看,赋予间接购买人反垄断诉权也契合我国间接购买人反垄断诉权规定模糊、反垄断私人诉讼发展不足、间接购买人诉讼缺失的实践需求。间接购买人反垄断诉权需要制度保障,应当明确过高索价的“转嫁”问题,完善代表人诉讼及公益诉讼制度,规定惩罚性损害赔偿,明确间接购买人损害赔偿的计算及分配方法。
Whether the law should indirectly confer antitrust rights on the part of purchasers is a controversial issue. In theory, the indirect buyer’s right to antitrust suit law corrective justice and antitrust law protect the rights and interests of consumers institutional purposes, in line with the anti-monopoly law of deterrence and compensation functions and In practice, giving indirect buyer antitrust rights is also in line with China’s indirect purchasers antitrust litigation vague provisions, the development of antitrust private litigation, indirect purchasers lack of litigation practice needs. Indirect purchase of antitrust rights need institutional protection, it should be clear over the issue of “transfer”, to improve the representative litigation and public interest litigation system, provides for punitive damages, a clear indirect purchaser damages calculation and distribution method .