China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China Regulates Monopolies Caused by Abuse of Administrative Power

Wed, 31 May 2023
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 10 Mar. 2023, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) issued the Provisions on Prohibiting the Acts of Eliminating or Restricting Competition by Abuse of Administrative Power (hereinafter the “Provisions”, 制止滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争行为规定).

This amendment comes four years after China enacted an interim version of the Provisions in 2019.

Among others, the following points are noteworthy.

  • Administrative authorities and organizations authorized by laws and regulations to manage public affairs shall not, directly or in a disguised form, restrict any entity or individual from trading with, purchasing, or using the goods or services provided by their designated operators through abuse of administrative power.
  • Where the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies consider that acts of eliminating and restricting competition through abuse of administrative power are constituted, they may make a recommendation to the relevant authority at a higher level regarding the disposition according to the law, which shall include measures to eliminate the relevant competition restrictions.
  • Where, during the investigation period, an entity under investigation has proactively taken measures to cease the relevant acts and eliminate the relevant restriction of competition, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency may terminate the investigation.

 

 

Cover Photo by set.sj on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

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.