美国反托拉斯法域外管辖权研究

被引：3

作者：

王中美

机构：

[1] 上海社会科学院世界经济研究所

来源：

关键词：

美国法律; 域外管辖权; 反垄断法; 效果原则;

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

D971.2 []; DD912.29 [];

学科分类号：

摘要：

最先提出并反复论证反垄断法域外管辖权的是美国。美国反托拉斯法判例中所确立的"效果原则"将国内反垄断立法的管辖权延伸至国外,并为包括中国在内的许多国家所效法。同时,美国也有相应的"合理管辖"原则对反托拉斯法域外管辖权的过度行使加以限制。但是总的来说,扩张行使反托拉斯管辖权的倾向近年来更为明显。

引用

页码：56 / 66+4 +4

页数：12

共 19 条

[1] Todhunter-Mitchell&Co.v.Anheuser-Busch.Inc. 383F.Supp.586(ED pa . 1974
[2] Laker AirwaysLtd. v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines. 731 F.2d 909 . 1984
[3] Conflict,Balancing of Interests and the Exercise of Jurisdiction to Prescribe:Re-flections on the Insurance Antitrust Case. Andreas F.Lowenfeld. American Journal of International Law . 1995
[4] Conflict,Balancing of Interests and the Exercise of Jurisdiction to Prescribe:Re-flections on the Insurance Antitrust Case. Andreas F.Lowenfeld. American Journal of International Law . 1995
[5] American Banana Company v.United Fruit Company. 29S Ct.5115121909 .
[6] Ti mberlane Lumber Co.v.Bank of America. 549F.2d597 . 1976
[7] Extraterritorial Application of U.S.Antitrust Law:WhatIs a‘Direct,Substantial,and Reasonably Foreseeable Effect’under the Foreign Trade Antitrust I mprove-ments Act?. Richard W.Beckler,and Matthew H.Kirtland. Texas International Law Journal . 2003
[8] Jurisdictional Issues before National Courts:The Insurance Antitrust Case. Andreas F.Lowenfeld. Ex-traterritorial Jurisdiction in Theory and Practice . 1996
[9] United States of America v.AluminumCompany of American et Al. 148F.2d416,443 . 1945
[10] Hartford Fire Insurance Co.et al.v.Californiaet al. 509U.S.764 .