Dual systems

Published On 27/09/2013 | By Peta Stevenson | Cartels, Enforcement, Litigation

Under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML), which has been in force since 2008, public and private enforcement have worked in tandem to promote compliance with the AML.

However, as the AML does not require regulatory action prior to the commencement of civil proceedings, issues can arise as to whether the two separate proceedings should progress in tandem or the private action should be stayed.

Beijing partner Susan Ning, along with Kate Peng, Jia Liu and Rui Li, have written an insightful overview of how the dual system of enforcement has worked in practice to date, and identify – on the fifth anniversary of the AML’s introduction – some issues that require further clarification.

Read their full article at China Law Insight.

Photo credit: liam_swinney / Foter / CC BY

 

Like this post? Share it... Email this to someone
email
Print this page
Print
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Google+
Google+

About The Author

is a partner in the Sydney office of King & Wood Mallesons where she specialises in competition litigation with experience in a wide range of jurisdictions. Peta also advises clients on the application of the anti-competitive conduct, consumer protection and access provisions of the Competition & Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and related state legislation. In 2001/02 she undertook her LLM at the University of Cambridge, during which time she developed a passionate if fleeting interest in rowing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

one × three =