Skip to main content

Abstract

Unilateral conducts, which are prohibited under Japanese Anti-Monopoly Act (the AMA), can be categorised in two types: (1) private monopolisation (Articles 3 and 2-5 of the AMA) and (2) unfair trade practices (Articles 9 and 2-9 of the AMA).

The opinion contained in this report is the personal view of the author and nothing to do with the opinion of the firm or other organisations to which the author belongs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In addition to the Sub-contract Law, the statutes which regulate specific industry sectors, such as the Telecommunications Business Law, the Electricity Business Law and the Gas Business Law impose obligation to business operators e.g. to allow access to essential facilities. These statutes could be also categorised as one of the special rules to the AMA, but we do not go into detail in this report.

  2. 2.

    Article 2-9-6 delegates the power to the JFTC to issue a list of prohibited conducts as General Designation.

  3. 3.

    JASRAC case, Supreme Court of Japan, 28 April 2015; NTT East case, Supreme Court of Japan, 17 December 2010.

  4. 4.

    Noda Soy Sauce case, Tokyo High Court, 25 December 1957.

  5. 5.

    NTT East case, Supreme Court of Japan, 17 December 2010. Please also note that the Supreme Court of Japan recently defined that “substantial restraint of trade” means that the market loses the competitive function, although it was in a bid-rigging case (Tama Bid-rigging case, Supreme Court of Japan, 20 February 2012).

  6. 6.

    Public prosecutors can bring criminal proceedings to the court subject to the JFTC’s accusation.

  7. 7.

    ECJ, case 85/76 Hoffmann-La Roche &. Co. AG v Commission, ECR 1979 46 (emphasis added).

  8. 8.

    JSARAC case, Supreme Court of Japan, 28 April 2015 (emphasis added).

  9. 9.

    Nevertheless, “abuse” probably has broader meaning than “exclusion” or “control” in nature.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takahiko Itoh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Itoh, T. (2017). Japan. In: Këllezi, P., Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P. (eds) Abuse of Dominant Position and Globalization & Protection and Disclosure of Trade Secrets and Know-How. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46891-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46891-4_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-46890-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-46891-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics