Anti-monopoly Law under scrutiny as key case goes to Higher Court
October 25, 2012 | BY
clpstaff &clp articlesA vertical price fixing dispute involving Johnson & Johnson has reached the Shanghai Higher People's Court, but one case will not be enough to clarify what constitutes sufficient burden of proof
The Shanghai No 1 Intermediate People's Court handed down its judgment in favour of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) on May 21. Rainbow Medical Equipment & Supplies then appealed the decision.
The appeal is to be held in a closed session, with the second hearing scheduled for October 30. The appeal to the Shanghai Higher People's Court is only the second anti-monopoly case to be heard by a Higher People's Court.
“If a court presumes resale price maintenance is restrictive of competition without having to lodge any evidence showing that the resale price maintenance (RPM) restricts competition, it makes it much easier for someone to complain about RPM,” said anti-monopoly practitioner Frank Schoneveld, of MWE China Law Offices in Shanghai.
This premium content is reserved for
China Law & Practice Subscribers.
A Premium Subscription Provides:
- A database of over 3,000 essential documents including key PRC legislation translated into English
- A choice of newsletters to alert you to changes affecting your business including sector specific updates
- Premium access to the mobile optimized site for timely analysis that guides you through China's ever-changing business environment
Already a subscriber? Log In Now