頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論全球化時代美國與歐體國際結合管制差異與衝突之緩和=The Mitigation of Differences and Conflicts between U.S. and EU Merger Regulations in the Era of Globalization |
---|---|
作 者 | 林心怡; | 書刊名 | 公平交易季刊 |
卷 期 | 13:2 2005.04[民94.04] |
頁 次 | 頁101-178 |
分類號 | 553.74 |
關鍵詞 | 全球化; 國際結合; 結合管制; Ge/Honeywell結合案; 世界貿易組織; 美國反托拉斯法; 歐體競爭法; 實質降低競爭標準; 優勢地位標準; 非協調互動效果; 單一優勢地位; 協調互動行為; 單一效果; 槓桿效應; 組合優勢; 範疇效果; 鞏固理論; Globalization; International merger; Merger regulation; WTO; U.S. antitrust law; EC competition law; SLC test; Dominance test; Non-coordinated effects; Single dominance; Coordinated interaction; Single effect; Leverage effect; Portfolio power; Range effect; Entrenchment theory; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 經濟全球化的同時,也產生了國際性的競爭問題,以傳統的分割的個別國家 (管轄權) 競爭法管制處理這些具有國際性的競爭問題,則不免發生諸多管制衝突與失能的現象。近年來,國際間成立了諸多不同層級的因應模式致力於這些問題的解決,然而,這些努力仍然無法避免衝突的發生:1999年Boeing與McDonnell Douglas以及2001年GE與Honeywell之結合案,皆發生不同國家 (管轄權) 間對同一結合案件審查結果有所歧異之問題,其中,2001年之GE與Honeywell之結合案,甚至導致了美國與歐體間之國際街突。 本案也引起了本文的研究動機,這個衝突案件的發生,究竟是否與美國與歐體在結合實體規範之制度面差異有所關連?為了釐清這個問題,本文對於美國與歐體之實體結合規範進行比較,探究其主要差異部分以及形成這些差異的根源,並藉由對於GE/Honeywell一案之分析,驗證補充前述抽象制度比較之結果。最後,本文基於這些差異的形成原因,重新檢討國際問各種因應國際性競爭問題之發展,並試圖對於如何緩和國際結合管制差異以及因此可能產生之衝突問題,提出本文之見解。 |
英文摘要 | As the trend toward economic globalization gains increasing momentum, what also emerge are problems associated with international competition. It is undeniable that certain phenomena are highly indicative of the conflicts in and the incapability of existing regulations to handle problems pertaining to “international” competition when individual “national” jurisdictions are employed. For example, both the merger of Boeing and McDonnell Douglas in 1999 and that of GE and Honeywell in 2001 led to considerably different decisions given that they had been based on the jurisdictions of the different countries involved, i.e. those of the U.S. and of the EU. The outcome of the latter case, in particular, sparked a flurry of heated discussions. It is, in fact, the GE/Honeywell case that serves as the motivation behind this research. At question is whether those different decisions had anything to do with the different substantive merger regulations. This paper first reviews the major differences between the substantive merger regulations of the U.S. and the EU and attempts to determine what the root causes of these differences are. In addition, it analyzes that specific case in order to more thoroughly examine the issue and supplement our discussion. Based on the findings, this paper reviews the relevant activities on bilateral, regional, and international levels, which are expected to deal with problems concerning international competition, and it proposes ways in which to mitigate differences between such regulations and ways in which to resolve any possible conflicts that may arise. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。