September 23, 2021

Volume XI, Number 266

Advertisement

September 22, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 21, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 20, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Competition Currents China & Japan | March 2021

China

On Feb. 7, 2021, the Anti-monopoly Committee of the State Council issued the Anti-monopoly Guide for the Platform Economy Sector (the “Platform Guide”). The Platform Guide represents a finalization of a previous draft released in November 2020. The rules under the Platform Guide apply to activities of the internet platform economy.

Highlights of the Platform Guide include the following:

  • Definition of the Relevant Market. In contrast to the general requirement that a market must be clearly defined before assessing market harm, the Platform Guide appears to create an exception when investigating cases in the internet platform economy. Article 4.3 of the Platform Guide suggests that there may be instances where the relevant market is not required.

  • MFN Clause. The Platform Guide provides that if a platform operator requires entities conducting business to agree to “most favored nation” (MFN) clauses, such a requirement may be considered a monopolistic agreement and abuse of market dominance. Even before promulgation of the Platform Guide, Chinese regulators were already scrutinizing MFN clauses, although not in the internet sphere.

  • Necessary Facilities. The Platform Guide specifies that if an internet platform is a “necessary facility,” then the platform operator shall not refuse to deal with operators that wish to utilize or conduct business on the platform without justifiable reasons. To determine whether a platform constitutes a “necessary facility,” factors such as the substitutability of alternative platforms, the platform’s data occupancy, and the degree of dependence of operators on that platform may be considered.

Japan

A. The Japan Fair Trade Commission (“JFTC”) reveals its final report on digital advertising.

On Feb. 17, 2021, the JFTC revealed its final report on digital advertising. This survey regarding trade practices in the digital advertising sector was conducted to promote efforts to prevent violations of the Antimonopoly Act (“AMA”) and ensure a fair and free competitive environment. As a result of the survey, JFTC stated that to create a competitive environment in the field of digital platforms, it is necessary not only to enforce the AMA but also to consider and take action under a variety of other regulations. The JFTC will continue to work actively on coordination and cooperation with the Headquarters for Digital Market Competition and other relevant ministries to maintain a competitive environment. 

B. New regulation concerning specific digital platforms goes into effect.

On Feb. 1. 2021, “the Act on the Improvement of Transparency and Fairness in Trading on Specified Digital Platforms” went into effect. For now, the Act covers online malls and app stores with a certain amount of domestic sales, but some commentators expect that this new regulation will apply to the digital-advertising market this spring.

C. First case fine imposed under the Exclusionary Private Monopolies guidelines.

On Feb. 19, 2021, JFTC issued a JPY 6,120,000 (approx. USD 60,000) penalty order against a company that sells aviation fuel. The case concerns the sale of aviation fuel at airports. JFTC found that the company effectively restricted competition by forcing its business partners not to receive refueling from newly entered competitors, thereby eliminating said competitors’ business activities. The company had warned its business partners that if they mixed their fuel with that of newly entered competitors, the business partners would not be able to continue fueling, and asked them to sign a document stating that they would not seek damages resulting from an accident after receiving fuel from the competitor.

This is the first case in Japan where a company has been ordered to pay a penalty for violation of the Exclusionary Private Monopoly guidelines. The guidelines, issued in 2019, prohibit an act by which an entrepreneur, alone or jointly with other entrepreneurs, attempts to monopolize a market by excluding competitors from the market or by obstructing new entrants.

 

Edoardo GambaroPamela J. MarpleYuji OgiwaraStephen M. PepperGillian SproulHans UrlusDawn (Dan) ZhangMari ArakawaFilip DrgasSimon HarmsMarta KownackaPietro MissanelliMassimiliano PizzoniaAnna Celejewska-RajchertJose Abel Rivera-PedrozaIppei SuzukiRebecca Tracy Rotem and Alan W. Hersh contributed to this article.

©2021 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved. National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 64
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Shareholder

Andrew G. Berg Chairs the Global Antitrust Litigation & Competition Regulation Practice and advises clients on litigation, mergers and acquisitions, and other antitrust and competition-related matters before the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ), state attorneys general, and in private litigation. Andrew's practice includes a full range of antitrust transactional and mergers and acquisitions experience, including Hart-Scott-Rodino filings at the FTC and DOJ, and related merger analysis issues. He also counsels...

202-.331-3181
Gregory Casas, Greenberg Traurig Law Firm, Austin, Houston, Energy and Business Litigation Law
Shareholder

Gregory J. Casas is the Administrative Shareholder for the Austin office and focuses his practice on antitrust, complex business litigation, and energy and natural resources law. Greg's antitrust and complex business litigation practices are international in scope. His antitrust practice includes litigating price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market allocation claims, and providing counseling for DOJ/FTC investigations, joint venture formation, mergers and acquisitions, pricing plans, and other contractual relationships. Greg's complex business litigation experience includes...

512-320-7238
Miguel Flores Bernés Antitrust & Competition Attorney Greenberg Traurig Mexico City, Mexico
Shareholder

Miguel Flores Bernés focuses his practice on antitrust and competition issues affecting clients in various industries, including government merger review, investigations of alleged anticompetitive conduct, litigation and counseling. He regularly represents clients before the two Mexican competition authorities: Comisión Federal de Competencia Económica and Instituto Federal de las Telecomunicaciones, and designed and implemented antitrust/competition compliance programs for clients in Mexico.

Prior to joining the firm, Miguel was a partner dedicated to antitrust and competition...

52 55-5029-0096
Calvin Ding Corporate and Compliance Lawyer Greenberg Traurig China
Shareholder

As a U.S. attorney who has worked in China for over decade, Calvin Ding has deep experience in international anti-corruption advisory and investigations, cross-border litigation and e-discovery, as well as compliance with Chinese anti-trust, anti-bribery, and privacy laws.

In the anti-corruption space, Calvin frequently advises companies on comprehensive compliance programs, risk assessments, pre-transaction compliance diligence, government policies, and internal investigations. Having spent several years working on the day-to-day implementation of an FCPA compliance program in...

86 (0) 21.6391.6633
Víctor Manuel Frías Garcés Commercial Law Attorney Greenberg Traurig Mexico City, Mexico
Shareholder

The practice of Victor Manuel Frías is focused on commercial law, including competition, mergers and acquisitions and arbitration.

On the competition side, Mr. Frías has represented clients in numerous cartel investigations before the Competition Commission in different industries for over 20 years. He frequently represents clients in pre-merger filings. Mr. Frías has been ranked by different publications as one of Mexico’s premier competition attorneys. He often appears before Mexico’s Federal Specialized Courts in Competition and Telecommunications matters.

On the M&A...

52 55-5029-0020
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement