The new legal interpretation now allows a plaintiff to file a lawsuit against a company it believes is engaged in monopolistic activities.
Before this interpretation was issued, an individual wasn't allowed to sue a company until the case was given the go-ahead by a government department, which first had to determine whether or not an anti-monopoly case was warranted.
Qiu Baochang, head lawyer at the China Consumers' Association, says the new judicial interpretation should go a long way toward creating an equal playing-field here in China.
"More detailed clauses and terms have been added into the judicial interpretation, making it a complement to the Antitrust Law which came into effect in 2008. With the interpretation, lawyers will find it easier when dealing with monopoly-related cases. It also simplified the judicial procedure for clients to file lawsuits when they are treated unfairly by monopoly enterprises."
Between 2008, when China's Antitrust Law was first introduced, and the end of last year, there were 61 civil litigations connected to alleged monopolies.
53 of them ended in a verdict in favor of the accused company.
Qiu Baochang explains why only 8 of the suits ended up being successful.
"The low rate success of plaintiffs in the prosecution was due to both a lack of knowledge regarding antitrust cases and difficulties obtaining evidence proving monopolistic behavior or abuse of market position. For instance, it is hard for customers to prove that the enterprise from which they purchased the products is involved in monopoly. So the judicial interpretation has reduced the plaintiff's burden to prove whether an industry giant, such as electricity and gas suppliers, has a dominant market position in civil disputes."
Qiu Baochang says the new ruling by China's Supreme court is likely going to spur regulators to conduct more strict investigations into international mergers and acquisitions.
For CRI, this is Wei Tong.
