The Internal Appeal of the FAS Russia: Procedure and Practice

For more than five years, the FAS Russia has been operating the institute of Internal appeal, which makes it possible to review certain types of decisions of territorial antimonopoly bodies out of court. At the same time, the Legal Department of the FAS Russia with the participation of the Association of Antimonopoly Experts formed the practice of preparing and publishing in the journal "Russian Competition Law and Economics" quarterly reviews of the most important decisions of the collegial bodies of the FAS Russia.During this time, valuable experience has been accumulated in the consideration of complaints against decisions of territorial antimonopoly bodies and uniform approaches to solving a number of key issues of antimonopoly law enforcement have been formed.The article discusses the important problems of Internal appeal of the FAS Russia related to the specification of grounds and the procedure for applying to the collegial bodies of the FAS Russia on complaints against decisions of territorial antimonopoly bodies.An assessment of the most important advantages and disadvantages of this institution is given, recommendations are formulated for optimizing the practice of protecting the rights and legitimate interests of economic entities when appealing decisions (orders) of territorial antimonopoly bodies.

The Problems of Qualifying an Act as a Cartel Agreement Prohibited by the Antimonopoly Legislation

The article is devoted to the definition of the main approaches to the qualification of an act as a cartel agreement prohibited by the antimonopoly legislation. On the example of materials of administrative and judicial practice, topical issues and problems of determining wrongfulness in acts qualified as cartel agreements, the validity of such qualification from the position of goals, principles, and systematic interpretation of the provisions of antimonopoly law are considered.

The Draft Fining Guidelines and the future of antitrust fines in China

Fines are a major part of the punishment and deterrence in China’s enforcement of its Antimonopoly Law. China has been drafting antitrust fining guidelines in the past several years and the current version is believed to be close to final. One natural question is: will the antitrust fining guidelines lead to harsher antitrust fines in China’s future enforcement? We attempt to answer this question by assessing whether fine recipients in China’s historical antitrust investigations would have received higher fines according to the Draft Fining Guidelines. Based on a large number of historical non-merger case decisions issued by China’s antitrust agencies through September 2019, our quantitative analysis shows that higher future fines should be expected in the future. We also explore several factors that might explain why historical fines were below the level predicted by the Draft Fining Guidelines.

FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE SUPERVISION OF BUSINESS COMPETITION AND THE PROHIBITION OF MONOPOLY PRACTICES

Nowadays, the law enforcement of prohibition monopolistic practices by KPPU is quite effective. But it is cannot be done optimally. This is influenced by the limited authority possessed by KPPU as regulated in Law No. Law. 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition or the Antitrust Law, making it difficult to enforce the law. The problem in this paper is how the KPPU functions in law enforcement prohibiting monopolistic practices. The method used in this paper is a method with a normative and empirical juridical approachThe results of the research show that to maximize the KPPU's function in carrying out their duties, it is necessary to make improvements to the Antimonopoly Law, such as the loading of the KPPU's authority and duties to make it clearer. The establishment of special regulations for KPPU that are more technical in the context of applying the substance of the Antimonopoly Law.

Analytical review of judicial cases considered with the participation of an antimonopoly body

The review contains an analysis of the legal positions of the arbitration courts in cases of violation of the antimonopoly legislation regarding the consideration of the following issues: an order of the antimonopoly body on transferring to the budget the income received as a result of violation of the antimonopoly law; non-payment of services received under the contract as an abuse of a dominant position; trust agreement as a condition for the admissibility of an anti-competitive agreement; claims of the antimonopoly body on forcing an economic entity to comply with the instructions of this body.Purpose: the formation of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

ABOUT SOME PROBLEMS OF ANTIMONOPOLY LEGISLATION OF RUSSIA

The article is devoted to the questionsof Russia antimonopoly law.

The Interior Appeal of the FAS of Russia: the Role of Legal Positions in the Development of Uniformity of Law Enforcement Practice

The article discusses some problems of the formation of a uniform law enforcement practice on the example of specific decisions of the FAS Russia Board of Appeals on issues related to: the application of the rules for the qualification of antitrust violations provided for in part 1 of art. 10 of the Federal Law «On Protection of Competition»; the need to prove the fulfillment of an agreement prohibited by art.16 of the same Law; the exercise of the right of the FAS Russia collegial bodies to refer the matter for a new consideration to the territorial antimonopoly body. It is concluded that the legal positions of the Appeal Board of FAS Russia, being based on the law and applied only in compliance with the law, help to effectively resolve controversial problems of pre-trial Antimonopoly law enforcement and to develop uniform approaches to the interpretation of the rules of competition law.