论文部分内容阅读
效率抗辩是《反垄断法》第17条规制滥用市场支配地位的重要规则。但效率概念的模糊与争议导致对效率抗辩很难形成共识。类型化方法具备连接价值与事实,发现“事物本质”的功能,因而对于效率概念的解释具备独特的方法论意义。首先,类型化方法有利于围绕效率价值进行概念解释,进而衍生出配置效率、生产效率以及动态效率等具体类型。其次,类型化方法有利于梳理包含或体现效率因素的法律事实。从反垄断法语境和法律适用的角度讲,还应当将上述三种效率类型解释为消费者福利、社会总福利以及创新。最后,类型化方法旨在发现效率的本质。因此,效率概念的解释应当围绕“福利改进”这一核心展开,并在价值与事实的连接中呈现出相应类型。
Efficiency defense is an important rule of Article 17 of the Antimonopoly Law regulating the abuse of market dominance. However, it is difficult to reach a consensus on the efficiency defense due to the vagueness and controversy of efficiency concepts. Typed methods possess the function of connecting values with facts and discovering “nature of things ”. Therefore, the explanation of the concept of efficiency possesses unique methodological significance. First of all, the typological approach is conducive to explain the concept of efficiency around the value, and then derived configuration efficiency, production efficiency and dynamic efficiency and other specific types. Second, the typological approach helps to sort out the legal facts that contain or embody efficiency factors. From the perspective of antitrust law and the application of law, the above three types of efficiency should also be interpreted as consumer welfare, total social welfare and innovation. Finally, the typed approach aims to discover the nature of efficiency. Therefore, the explanation of the concept of efficiency should focus on the core of “welfare improvement” and show the corresponding type in the link between value and fact.