Arbitration Clauses May Not Preclude Courts from Adjudicating Monopoly Civil Disputes.

Journal article

1 electronic resource (page 286-288)

Extract Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on ‘Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Disputes over Monopoly’, Arts. 3, 4, 5, and para. 2 of Art. 51, and Arts. 24, 122, Item 2 of para. 1 of Art. 177; Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, Art. 178 ‒ Vegetable Wholesale Market Headnotes by the Editorial Office 1. Although a contract may stipulate that disputes arising during its performance should be resolved through negotiation or arbitration, this does not necessarily exclude court jurisdiction. Judicial intervention may be necessary when the case extends beyond the contractual rights and obligations of the parties to include issues such as the existence of a dominant market position, its potential abuse, and any alleged monopolistic conduct. 2. These issues, which directly affect the fairness of market competition, consumer interests, and the public interest, should not be confined solely to arbitration agreements between the parties.

Crossref

GRUR International ; 74, 3, 2025, 2632-8550.

[Oxford, England] : Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025.

English

https://academic.oup.com/grurint/article/72/3/231/6998505

External Online Journals > GRUR