论文部分内容阅读
在纵向垄断协议纠纷案件中,作为垄断协议的一方是垄断行为的实施者和行为者,并且已经从垄断行为中获得了利益,对于此类主体是否要赋予其提起损害赔偿之诉的资格一直存有争议。本文从诉权否定到有限诉权的发展过程探讨了各种观点的法理蕴含,提出只有跳出私法而从公法的高度来看待纵向垄断协议当事方诉权问题,才能从协议主体的私法违法和促进市场竞争方面获得平衡,并更有效、更准确地把握赋予作为违法的纵向垄断协议当事一方享有诉权的边界,而这些正是我国建立纵向垄断协议当事方主体资格理论应当借鉴的。
In the case of a dispute over vertical monopoly agreements, the party that is the monopoly agreement is the implementer and actor of the monopoly and has already benefited from the monopoly. Whether or not such subject should be given the right to sue for damages has been kept Controversial. This article explores the legal implication of various opinions from the development of the denial of rights and the limited right of action. It suggests that only by jumping out of private law and from the perspective of public law, can the rights and interests of the parties to the vertical monopoly agree to violate the law and promote market competition It is more effective and more accurate to grasp the boundaries of the right to sue given to one of the parties to the vertical monopoly agreement as a violation of law, which should be drawn from the theory of the main qualifications of the parties to establish the vertical monopoly agreement in our country.