论文部分内容阅读
作为现代反垄断法应对信息不对称和信息加工处理难题的主要制度手段之一,举证责任的科学分配不仅关涉到违法行为的认定与否和原被告双方的诉讼成败,更关涉到反垄断法律制度运行效率的高低和法益目标的实现。我国《反垄断法》及其司法解释对反垄断民事诉讼案件中的原告、被告举证责任尽管作了特殊规定,但相关规定在司法实践中并未被有关法院所完全遵从。从理论上走出盲目照搬民事诉讼法一般举证责任原则的认识误区,厘清反垄断法举证责任分配特殊规则存在的正当理据,进而优化中国反垄断法举证责任分配规则,是非常必要的。
As one of the main systems and measures of modern antitrust law to deal with the problem of information asymmetry and information processing, the scientific distribution of the burden of proof not only involves the cognizance of the illegal act and the success or failure of the original defendant, but also the antitrust legal system The level of operational efficiency and the realization of legal interests. China’s “Anti-Monopoly Law” and Its Judicial Interpretations Despite the special provisions on the burden of proof on plaintiffs and defendants in the case of antitrust civil litigation, the relevant provisions have not been fully complied with in the judicial practice in judicial practice. Theoretically, it is necessary to go beyond the misunderstanding of blindly copying the principle of general burden of proof in civil procedural law, clarify the justification of the special rules of the burden of proof in the anti-monopoly law and then optimize the rules for the allocation of burden of proof in China’s anti-monopoly law.