scholarly journals Implementasi Pasal 17 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 tahun 1999 terhadap Rule Of Reason (Studi di Komisi Pengawasan Persaingan Usaha Wilayah II Kota Batam)

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-30
Author(s):  
Ukas Ukas ◽  
Zulkifli Zulkifli
Keyword(s):  

Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat sebenarnya tidak lepas dari krisis moneter yang kemudian berlanjut kepada krisis ekonomi yang melanda Indonesia dipertengahan tahun 1997, dimana pemerintah didasarkan bahwa sebenarnya Fundamental ekomoni Indonesia terjadi karena beberapa kebijakan pemerintah di beberapa sektor ekonomi yang kurang tepat yang menyebabkan pasar menjadi terdistorsi (penjelasan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat). Dunia persaingan usaha adalah dunia yang kompleks dan mencangkup beberapa sektor kehidupan termasuk sektor-sektor vital yang bersentuhan langsung dengan kehidupan masyarakat. Harmonisasi Pasal 17 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat yang tertuang didalam BAB IV Tentang Kegiatan yang dilarang pada bahagian Monopoli pelaku usaha dilarang melakukan penguasaan atas produksi dan/atau pemasaran barang dan/atau jasa yang dapat menyebabkan terjadinya praktek Monopoli atau persaingan usaha yang tidak sehat. Pelaku usaha patut di duga atau di anggap bersalah. Tujuan dari pengajuan penelitian ini nantinya di harapkan untuk: Pertama, Memberikan Pemahaman Kepada Pelaku Usaha Hal-Hal atau Pendekatan Terhadap Pelanggaran Baik Bersifat Perjanjian yang di Larang Maupun Pelanggaran Bentuk Lainnya. Kedua, Memberikan Pemahaman Kepada Pihak (Pelaku Usaha) Tentang Mencegah Praktek Monopoli dan/atau Perjanjian Usaha yang Tidak Sehat Baik yang di Atur dalam Pasal 5 dan Pasal 17 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat, Termasuk Sanksi atas Pelanggaran dari Kedua Pasal Tersebut. Penelitian ini di lakukan dengan jenis Penelitian yuridis empiris yaitu penelitian yang langsung terjun ke lapangan.

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-198
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Zakhary

In California Dental Association v. FTC, 119 S. Ct. 1604 (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that a nonprofit affiliation of dentists violated section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C.A. § 45 (1998), which prohibits unfair competition. The Court examined two issues: (1) the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) jurisdiction over the California Dental Association (CDA); and (2) the proper scope of antitrust analysis. The Court unanimously held that CDA was subject to FTC's jurisdiction, but split 5-4 in its finding that the district court's use of abbreviated rule-of-reason analysis was inappropriate.CDA is a voluntary, nonprofit association of local dental societies. It boasts approximately 19,000 members, who constitute roughly threequarters of the dentists practicing in California. Although a nonprofit, CDA includes for-profit subsidiaries that financially benefit CDA members. CDA gives its members access to insurance and business financing, and lobbies and litigates on their behalf. Members also benefit from CDA marketing and public relations campaigns.


2005 ◽  
pp. 100-116
Author(s):  
S. Avdasheva ◽  
A. Shastitko

The article is devoted to the analysis of the draft law "On Protection of Competition", which must substitute the laws "On Competition and Limitation of Monopolistic Activity on Commodity Markets" and "On Protection of Competition on the Financial Services Market". The innovations enhancing the quality of Russian competition law and new norms providing at least ambiguous effects on antimonopoly regulation are considered. The first group of positive measures includes unification of competition norms for commodity and financial markets, changes of criteria and the scale of control of economic concentrations, specification of conditions, where norms are applied "per se" and according to the "rule of reason", introduction of rules that can prevent the restriction of competition by the executive power. The interpretation of the "collective dominance" concept and certain rules devoted to antimonopoly control of state aid are in the second group of questionable steps.


Author(s):  
Tu T. Nguyen ◽  
Timo Minssen ◽  
Xavier Groussot
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Anthony Carty

The view that no form of international law existed in seventeenth-century France, and that this time was a part of ‘prehistory’, and thus irrelevant for international legal thought today is challenged. In addition, the traditional claim of Richelieu to be an admirer of Machiavelli and his Ragion di Stato doctrine to the detriment of the aim of concluding treaties and keeping them (as sacred), is refuted by careful historical research. In Richelieu’s thinking, there is a role for law to play but it is law as justice, law in the classical natural law tradition. Those who rule are subject to the rule of law as justice, the rule of God, or the rule of reason. In Richelieu’s world, kings and ministers are rational instruments of the practical implementation of God’s will on earth.


Ethics ◽  
1938 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-542
Author(s):  
James Feibleman
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document