IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/scn/vgmu00/2017i3p51-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Оценка Эффектов При Запрете Антиконкурентных Соглашений: Решения Арбитражных Судов

Author

Abstract

Оценка эффектов потенциально ограничивающих конкуренцию действий становится необходимым условием применения антимонопольных запретов в практике зрелых юрисдикций. Российское законодательство также предусматривает оценку и взвешивание эффектов потенциально запрещенной практики для ряда нарушений закона "О защите конкуренции", в том числе ограничивающих конкуренцию соглашений. Развитие практики оценки эффектов требует анализа достигнутых в этом направлении результатов, что и является целью статьи.В статье анализируются два направления экономического анализа поведения участников рынка. А именно оценка эффектов для целей признания практики, ограничивающей конкуренцию, в противоположность применению запретов на основе формальных признаков (effect-based vs object-based enforcement) и оценка эффектов для сопоставления положительных и отрицательных результатов практики в противоположность применению запретов по букве закона (rule of reason vs per se illegality). Показано, что увеличение роли оценки эффектов в правоприменении способно повысить общественное благосостояние. В то же время действующее законодательство и система мотивации, допускающие оценку эффектов, не стимулируют ее применение антимонопольным органом. Проанализирована база данных судебных решений (400 дел, инициированных в 2008-2012 гг.) по оспариванию решений и предписаний ФАС России о незаконных соглашениях и согласованных действиях. Показано, что соображения эффективности (положительных эффектов реализации соглашений) крайне редко определяют решения суда (всего в 5 из 400 решений). Если же это происходит, то принципы сопоставления эффектов ограничения конкуренции и выигрышей общества носят достаточно произвольный характер без полноценной количественной оценки.

Suggested Citation

  • Авдашева С. Б. & Макаров А. В., 2017. "Оценка Эффектов При Запрете Антиконкурентных Соглашений: Решения Арбитражных Судов," Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления // Public administration issues, НИУ ВШЭ, issue 3, pages 51-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:scn:vgmu00:2017:i:3:p:51-71
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://vgmu.hse.ru/data/2017/10/06/1159546517/%D0%90%D0%B2%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0,%20%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%203-2017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svetlana Avdasheva & Dina Tsytsulina & Elena Sidorova, 2015. "The Use of Key Performance Indicators for the FAS: Analysis Based on the Statistics of Adjudications," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 7-34.
    2. Nuno Garoupa & Matteo Rizzolli, 2012. "Wrongful Convictions Do Lower Deterrence," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 168(2), pages 224-231, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Svetlana Avdasheva & Andrew Makarov, 2017. "Effect Assessment under Russian Enforcement against Anticompetitive Agreements: Decisions of Commercial Courts," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 51-71.
    2. Grajzl, Peter & Baniak, Andrzej, 2018. "Private enforcement, corruption, and antitrust design," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 284-307.
    3. Andrei Y. Shastitko & Svetlana V. Golovanova, 2014. "Collusion in markets characterized by one large buyer: lessons learned from an antitrust case in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 49/EC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. Mungan Murat C., 2018. "Mere Preparation," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-15, July.
    5. Obidzinski, Marie & Oytana, Yves, 2019. "Identity errors and the standard of proof," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 73-80.
    6. Шаститко А. Е. & Павлова Н. С., 2021. "Антиконкурентные Последствия Антимонопольной Политики: Кейс Мобильных Операторов," Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления // Public administration issues, НИУ ВШЭ, issue 2, pages 7-33.
    7. Matteo Rizzolli, 2016. "Adjudication: Type-I and Type-II Errors," CERBE Working Papers wpC15, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    8. Šastitko, Andrej E., 2013. "Effects of third party errors," EconStor Preprints 121747, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Matteo Rizzolli & Luca Stanca, 2012. "Judicial Errors and Crime Deterrence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(2), pages 311-338.
    10. Bertrand Chopard & Edwige Marion & Ludivine Roussey, 2014. "Does the Appeals Process Lower the Occurrence of Legal Errors?," EconomiX Working Papers 2014-43, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    11. Thomas J. Miceli & Murat C. Mungan, 2021. "The limit of law: factors influencing the decision to make harmful acts illegal," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 293-307, September.
    12. Roee Sarel, 2022. "Crime and punishment in times of pandemics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 155-186, October.
    13. Chopard Bertrand & Fain Edwige & Roussey Ludivine, 2018. "Does the Appeals Process Reduce the Occurrence of Legal Errors?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, July.
    14. Avdasheva, Svetlana & Golovanova, Svetlana & Katsoulacos, Yannis, 2019. "The role of judicial review in developing evidentiary standards: The example of market analysis in Russian competition law enforcement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 101-114.
    15. Avdasheva, Svetlana & Kryuchkova, Polina, 2015. "The ‘reactive’ model of antitrust enforcement: When private interests dictate enforcement actions – The Russian case," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 200-208.
    16. Natalia Pavlova & Andrey Shastitko, 2014. "Effects Of Hostility Tradition In Antitrust: Leniency Programs And Cooperation Agreements," HSE Working papers WP BRP 58/EC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    17. Ajit Mishra & Andrew Samuel, 2018. "Law Enforcement And Wrongful Arrests With Endogenously (In)Competent Officers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(2), pages 1417-1436, April.
    18. Robertson, Matthew J., 2018. "Wrongful Conviction, Persuasion and Loss Aversion," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 48, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    19. Mungan, Murat C., 2015. "Wrongful convictions and the punishment of attempts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 79-87.
    20. Rizzolli, Matteo & Tremewan, James, 2018. "Hard labor in the lab: Deterrence, non-monetary sanctions, and severe procedures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 107-121.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:scn:vgmu00:2017:i:3:p:51-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ирина Александровна Зверева (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vgmu.hse.ru/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.