China: Civil Actions Under China's Anti-Monopoly Law - Five Major Cases, Five Major Lessons (Part II)

Last Updated: 10 February 2010

Article by Hannah C. L. Ha , John M. Hickin and Gerry P. O'Brien

Originally published 9 February 2010

Keywords: civil actions, China, anti-monopoly law, AML, competition, dominant market position

This is the second in a two-part series of updates focussing on the topic of civil action rights under the AML.

In Part I (available here) we looked at the basis for AML civil actions, before turning to examine five of the more notable cases concluded so far - commonly referred to as the GAQSIQ case, the China Mobile case, the Shanda case, the Baidu case and the Beijing Netcom case.

In this Part II, we seek to identify the major themes that can be drawn from these cases, and related lessons that should be heeded by companies operating in (or selling into) China.

Lesson 1

CIVIL ACTIONS MAY DRIVE AML ENFORCEMENT FOR SOME TIME TO COME

When the AML commenced, it was expected that the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (SAIC) and National Development & Reform Commission (NDRC) would lead the way in conduct rule enforcement. There was a widespread assumption that the civil action regime would develop slowly, while the SAIC and NDRC's experience enforcing pre-AML antitrust laws would allow it to forge ahead with investigations and prosecutions.

However, to date the primary AML-related activities of these bodies have been the organisation of staff-training forums, and preparation of enforcement guidelines and implementation rules. With no clear timeline for finalisation of these documents, and indications that both the SAIC and NDRC lack sufficient resources to engage in anything more than ad hoc 'cherry picking' enforcement efforts, it appears many individuals and business operators who believe they are the victims of monopolistic conduct may conclude that civil actions represent the best forum to pursue claims.

In this context, and with the prospect of a "double damages" incentive increasing the volume of cases in this area, it is not unreasonable to expect that the most significant developments under the AML's conduct rules in 2010 will stem from civil actions.

Companies seeking to mitigate AML-related risks should therefore pay close attention to any competition-related concerns raised by their customers and trading partners (as well as competitors) to ensure these do not escalate into substantive civil action claims.

Lesson 2

PLAINTIFFS MUST SATISFY HIGH EVIDENTIARY THRESHOLDS

Several of the cases mentioned in this series of updates failed (at least in part) because the relevant plaintiffs were not able to prove that a defendant held a dominant market position.

In the Baidu case, for example, the plaintiff (Renren) invoked Article 19 of the AML - which provides for a presumption of dominance to be drawn for business operators that possess a market share exceeding 50 percent.

The court accepted the plaintiff's submission that the relevant market impacted by the conduct of the defendant (Baidu) was China's search engine service market. Applying market definition principles articulated in the AML and the Guidelines for the Definition of Relevant Market issued by China's Anti-Monopoly Commission in May 2009, the court noted that Renren's market definition was supported by the fact that no other type of web service was closely substitutable for search engine services, and cultural and language factors specific to China supported identification of a China-wide geographic market.

However, Renren submitted just two documents in support of its submission that Baidu's share of this market exceeded 50 percent. One document was a report from the China Securities Journal, and the other was a news article from Baidu's own website. The court held that these reports did not discharge the plaintiff's burden, for reasons that included a lack of supporting evidence for the market share levels attributed to Baidu in the articles and a lack of clarity regarding how they were calculated.

Similarly, in the Shanda case, the plaintiff noted that a website operated by the defendant (Shanda) stated that its share of the online literature market in China was over 80 percent. However, the court ruled that these were only advertisements or only reflected promotions and were not sufficient to prove the defendant's dominant market position without other evidence.

Cases such as these demonstrate the importance of providing detailed evidence to support any claim that a defendant enjoys a dominant market position. In this context, it is appropriate to have regard to Article 18 of the AML, which lists several factors that must be taken into account when an assessment is made on this issue - thereby providing a roadmap for parties seeking to gather information to substantiate a dominance claim.

The Shanda case also suggests that Chinese courts will be (appropriately) cautious in relying on news reports and parties' own statements about market dominance, especially when the statements are made in a context that can be considered marketing or "puffery."

Lesson 3

LONG DELAYS WILL INCREASE TRIAL UNCERTAINTIES

Approximately fourteen months elapsed between acceptance of the Beijing Netcom case by the Chaoyang District People's Court on 1 August 2008 and the decision by the Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People's Court on 24 December 2009. Similar timeframes have applied for other cases, and the prospects for speedy resolution of most AML-related claims will remain low given the tendency of China's judiciary to consult widely (including by holding workshops with relevant scholars and government officials) before making a decision.

Of course, long delays in the hearing of antitrust cases is not a phenomenon that is confined to China. However, delays in the context of AML-related cases has unique implications for litigants at the present time.

This is because China's courts are guided in their interpretation of the AML by the implementation rules and associated guidance documents published by the SAIC and NDRC. At present, these bodies have only published a handful of draft guidance documents in relation to the conduct rules, and it is expected that we will see these drafts and further relevant measures finalised throughout 2010.

Accordingly, present and forthcoming cases may well be decided with reference to regulatory guidance that is yet to surface. This increases the level of uncertainty for all parties involved in AML-related civil actions in China, and may encourage stalling tactics by litigants who anticipate the future release of guidance documents that may assist their case.

Lesson 4

THREATENING AML LITIGATION MAY BE A NEGOTIATION TACTIC

To date, none of the major cases that have been brought under the AML have involved foreign companies. However, it is understood that several large multinationals have been threatened with lawsuits for alleged breaches of the AML in circumstances that suggest these threats are being invoked as a negotiation 'leveraging' tool.

It is understandable that multinationals (and prominent domestic Chinese companies) will be wary of submitting to court hearings regarding AML-related claims, even in circumstances where they are confident they have not acted in an unlawful anti-competitive manner. At this stage there exists significant uncertainties regarding how the law will be applied, particularly given the lack of finalised implementation rules and guidance documents pertaining to the AML conduct rules, and the relative inexperience (and independence) of China's judiciary when it comes to hearing antitrust matters.

It is likely China Mobile took these factors into account when it settled the lawsuit bought by the plaintiff Zhou in the China Mobile case. In the absence of further detail about the lawsuit being publicly available, it is difficult to assess the merits of Zhou's claims against China Mobile - but it is clear that the alleged abuse conduct is not typical of the types of discriminatory pricing claims usually litigated in courts in other jurisdictions.

Accordingly, companies will need to be wary of the threat of AML-related lawsuits being used as a negotiation tactic to force changes to existing and proposed trading arrangements. The commercial imperatives of a relevant deal in such cases will need to be weighed against the risks involved with allowing AML-related lawsuits to be heard by the courts, particularly as a defeat could also lead to a regulatory investigation and a fine of up to 10 percent of business turnover - and potentially significant brand damage and flow-on claims.

Lesson 5

AML CLAIMS CAN RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT BRAND DAMAGE

Most business operators recognise that the consequences of failing to comply with competition laws can go beyond financial penalties and mandated changes to business practices. Because these laws are at least partially designed to protect the interests of consumers, companies that violate competition laws may be seen as trampling on consumer rights and thereby suffer enormous brand damage.

This is particularly true in China, where AML-related cases have been receiving significant media exposure, and companies involved in such cases have been the subject of strident criticism on the internet and other public discussion forums. While this has been most evident in the field of merger review, with the primary example being public hostility to Coca-Cola in the lead-up to Mofcom's rejection of their bid for China's Huiyuan Juice Group, it is also increasingly apparent in the context of AML-related civil actions.

For example, China's media have reported significant online discussion of the China Mobile case, with many 'netizens' expressing support for Zhou's claim and the general premise that some pricing policies of China's leading telecommunications provider were unfair and an abuse of its market dominance. Similar scenarios are understood to have arisen in the context of the Baidu case and the Beijing Netcom case.

It can be expected that the level of public attention will be even greater in cases concerning the conduct of foreign multinationals. Accordingly, foreign companies need to be wary of the fact that any goodwill they may have been able to generate through positive engagement with Chinese society risks being rapidly eradicated by the stigma of AML-related claims (particularly those founded on allegations of 'dominance') - even if they are successful in defending those claims.

Conclusion

Since the AML came into force, an increasing number of AML cases have been filed in various Chinese courts. While many of the early cases did little to develop the jurisprudence, recent decisions have begun to shed light on the scope of the AML's conduct rules, and the evidentiary standards that must be satisfied to substantiate claims in this area.

To date, there are no known cases finding that any organisation or company has violated the AML, and it seems no foreign companies have been involved in AML litigation. This is encouraging, as it indicates that China's courts are imposing appropriate evidentiary standards for the establishment of AML-related claims, and that foreign multinationals are not being unfairly singled out for 'test cases'. Nonetheless, it will be prudent for all businesses operating in China to reduce their exposure to litigation by conducting compliance training, auditing potential compliance risks and judiciously handling relevant complaints or concerns raised by customers, trading partners and competitors.

Learn more about our Hong Kong office and Antitrust & Competition practice.

Visit us at www.mayerbrownjsm.com

Copyright 2010. JSM, Mayer Brown International LLP and/or Mayer Brown LLP. All rights reserved. Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization comprising legal practices that are separate entities ("Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: JSM, a Hong Kong partnership, and its associated entities in Asia; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales; and Mayer Brown LLP, a limited liability partnership established in the United States. The Mayer Brown Practices are known as Mayer Brown JSM in Asia.

This article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein. Please also read the JSM legal publications Disclaimer.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions