2018 is an important year for China's anti monopoly law enforcement.Firstly,2018 marks the tenth anniversary of the implementation of the Anti monopoly Law.Secondly,2018 has undergone significant changes in the anti monopoly law enforcement agencies,from the previous pattern where the National Development and Reform Commission,the Ministry of Commerce,and the State Administration of Industry and Commerce were responsible for anti monopoly law enforcement,to the unified responsibility of the State Administration of Market Supervision for anti monopoly law enforcement.Therefore,relevant business concentration There is a unified regulatory body for the review of monopoly agreements and abuse of market dominance.As of November 2018,the reform of the antimonopoly law enforcement agencies at the level of the General Administration of Market Supervision has been completed.The establishment of the General Administration of Market Supervision is expected to further promote the integration and allocation of resources,which is conducive to further unification and strengthening of antimonopoly law enforcement.

"The United States is now imposing tariffs on goods valued at$11 billion in the EU!"US President Trump threatened to tax EU products on social media on the 9th in retaliation for EU subsidies to Airbus.In response,the European Union said it would soon take retaliatory measures.US media say it is difficult to break out a comprehensive trade war between the US and Europe,but this matter undoubtedly further complicates bilateral economic and trade negotiations and will harm the already shaken US Europe relationship.

Suggestions on reviewing the legality of the"Administrative Measures for the Identification,Investigation and Punishment of Illegal Acts in Construction Project Contracting and Contracting"issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development:

At the beginning of 2019,the State Administration of Market Supervision announced the"Provisions on Prohibiting Monopoly Agreements(Draft for Comments)",which provides more comprehensive provisions on prohibited monopoly agreements,and the introduction of the"safe harbor"system is one of its very distinctive features.The introduction of safe harbor rules makes monopoly agreements that do not constitute significant restrictions on competition presumed not to exclude or restrict competition,thereby benefiting from the exemption of"safe harbor".The following is an interpretation of the specific provisions on the safe harbor system in the"Provisions on the Prohibition of Monopoly Agreements(Draft for Comments)",and a comparative analysis with similar foreign legislation.

main points:
In foreign trade investigations with China,the discriminatory treatment originally targeted at state-owned enterprises has extended to the entire industry under investigation or downstream industries.In this regard,Chinese enterprises and the government should be prepared for a long-term and arduous game.

Introduction:Since the beginning of 2004,he has become a practicing lawyer and has rich legal practice experience,specializing in construction engineering and real estate,corporate mergers and acquisitions,cultural creativity,and other professional legal fields.He has been or is working for China Resources Group,McDonald's China headquarters,Bank of China Hong Kong,Beijing Construction Engineering,Guangzhou Shenzhen Railway,Liantai Group,Shenzhen Zhongzhou Group,Shenzhen Wealth Group,Shenzhen Tianli Group,Shenzhen Golden Guanghua Group,Haijixing Hengming Real Estate Group,Fenghuo Creativity,Seeing Culture,etc.provide professional legal services.

Huawei should not be surprised by the fact that Ms.Meng has been detained and faces extradition.The duration of bail hearings and the conditions of bail appear to be relatively harsh and rare.In fact,Canadian courts rarely refuse bail,except for a few highly harmful and malignant criminal offences.The Canadian Federal Criminal Code does not provide for discriminatory treatment even for non residents who are formally charged with criminal charges,based on the principle of the presumption of innocence.Ms.Meng has not even been criminally charged or convicted by the United States.This is a prerequisite for requesting extradition and arrest.These prerequisites are not met.The party requesting extradition clearly relies on the"temporary arrest"clause of Article 11 of the US Canada Extradition Treaty,"Emergency Moments".If the United States Department of Justice cannot submit the documents and evidence required by the treaty within 45 days,the Canadian courts must restore Meng's personal freedom.Fortunately and unfortunately,bail and extradition defenses require a high level of defense,requiring not only a comprehensive understanding and analysis of the integrity and reliability of extradition documents in a very short period of time,but also a profound understanding of the political and economic factors in the relations of the relevant countries,and a good and spotless legal counsel practice record.In addition to the court systems of both countries,extradition cases also directly involve the administrative,diplomatic,and law enforcement departments of at least two countries.The extradition law is ancient and brand new,belonging to the modern cold weapon.A slight carelessness may turn a live case into a dead case,making it difficult to overturn it.

On May 31, 2018, the Court of Justice of the EU made a preliminary ruling in the Ernst&Young P/S v Konkurrencer ä det case. 2 The European Court held that the control of concentration of operators in Article 7, paragraph 1, of the EU Regulation on Mergers and Acquisitions ("preemptive"), It should be interpreted as "a certain concentration should be implemented by only one exchange, and the transaction will lead to the transfer of control of the target enterprise in whole or in part, in fact, or in law. Regardless of whether the termination of the cooperation agreement has had market effects, the termination of the cooperation agreement in this case should not be considered as a situation that can lead to a certain concentration implementation.". Therefore, the European Court of Justice held that the termination of the cooperation agreement involved in this case should not be regarded as a "preemption".

This month,the United States will announce its decision on whether to initiate a"dual anti"investigation into China's passenger cars and light truck tires.If the United States launches a"double anti"investigation,the Chinese tire market will face tremendous pressure.Relevant enterprises should be prepared to respond to the positive factors in this case and strive for a favorable outcome to the greatest extent.