China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

Alibaba, China Literature and Hive Box Internet Fined for Anti-monopoly Violations - China Legal News

Wed, 13 Jan 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

avatar

 

China's State Administration for Market Regulation imposed administrative punishments on the three Internet giants and disclosed to reporters its considerations in imposing the punishments.  

Alibaba(阿里巴巴), one of the largest Internet companies in China, owns China's largest e-commerce platform Taobao and Tmall.

China Literature(阅文), whose main business is online books, is a subsidiary of Tencent (another Internet giant in China).

Hive Box(丰巢), whose business is to set up self-service package lockers in the community, is a subsidiary of China's largest express delivery company S.F. Express.

All three companies were punished, for not reporting the implementation of the concentration to the antitrust enforcement departments before the merger and acquisition of other companies.

In the past month, China has leveled up its antitrust enforcement efforts. On 19 Dec. 2020, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China convened the Central Economic Working Conference, which specifically stressed the need to strengthen anti-monopoly. In the future, the antitrust enforcement by the Chinese government may continue to be strengthened.

The written decisions of administrative punishment for the above three companies are as follows:

Alibaba: http://www.samr.gov.cn/fldj/tzgg/xzcf/202012/t20201214_ 324334.html

China Literature: http://www.samr.gov.cn/fldj/tzgg/xzcf/202012/t20201214_ 324340.html

Hive Box: http://www.samr.gov.cn/fldj/tzgg/xzcf/202012/t20201214_ 324337.html

Contributors: Yanru Chen 陈彦茹

Save as PDF

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.

China Overhauls Arbitration Law for Global Alignment

Having entered into force on March 1, 2026, China’s first comprehensive revision of its 1995 Arbitration Law has introduced ad hoc arbitration, strengthened interim relief, and aligned the legal framework more closely with international standards.