Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Merger Review Procedure

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Chinese Merger Control Law

Part of the book series: Munich Studies on Innovation and Competition ((MSIC,volume 2))

  • 746 Accesses

Abstract

The Chinese merger review procedure encompasses a voluntary pre-filing procedure and a formal two-phase merger review process. The details of the merger review procedure are stipulated in a set of implementing rules, namely the Reporting Measures, which have been cited above in Sect. 7.3.2; “Measures for the Review of Concentrations of Business Operators”, issued by MOFCOM on 24 November 2009 (“Review Measures”); “Guiding Opinion on Reporting of Concentrations of Business Operators”, issued by the AMB on 5 January 2009 (“Reporting Opinion”); “Guiding Opinion on Documents and Information Required for Reporting of Concentrations of Business Operators”, issued by the AMB on 7 January 2009 (“Documents Opinion”); and a “Flowchart for Anti-Monopoly Reviews of Concentrations of Business Operators”, published by the AMB on 1 January 2009 (“Flowchart for Review”). In terms of legal hierarchy, it is to be noted that the Reporting Measures and Review Measures are departmental rules issued by MOFCOM, while the other documents are only guiding opinions issued by the lower-level AMB and without any statutory character and binding effect. The AMB has clarified in its “Interpretation on Measures for the Reporting of Concentrations of Business Operators and Measures for the Review of Concentrations of Business Operators”, issued on 15 January 2010 (“AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures”) that in the event that the measures are in conflict with the guiding opinions, the measures shall prevail.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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.

    经营者集中审查办法, see Chinese version at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/c/200911/20091106639145.html, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at 24/1 CLP 52-55 (2010).

  2. 2.

    关于经营者集中申报的指导意见, see Chinese version at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/xgxz/200901/20090105993824.html, last accessed 16 February 2011, English translation at 23/1 CLP 75-77 (2009).

  3. 3.

    关于经营者集中申报文件资料的指导意见, see Chinese version at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/xgxz/200901/20090105993841.html, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at 23/1 CLP 78-81 (2009). The Documents Opinion also contains a sample notification form (which is updated by MOFCOM from time to time).

  4. 4.

    商务部经营者集中反垄断审查流程图, see Chinese version at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/xgxz/200901/20090105993080.html, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at 23/1 CLP 84 (2009).

  5. 5.

    Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  6. 6.

    商务部反垄断局关于《经营者集中申报办法》和《经营者集中审查办法》的解读, see Chinese version at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/j/201001/20100106747363.html, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at http://www.mwechinalaw.com/news/2010/chinalawalert0110b.htm, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  7. 7.

    See Section 12 AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures.

  8. 8.

    中华人民共和国合同法, see Chinese version at http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-07/11/content_13695.htm, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Law/2007-12/11/content_1383564.htm, last accessed 12 January 2014. Its Article 52 No. (5) provides that a contract is invalid if “mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations are violated”, and Article 56 sentence 1 sets forth that “an invalid (…) contract does not have legal binding force from the outset”.

  9. 9.

    上市公司收购管理办法, see Chinese version at http://www.chinanews.com/gj/kong/news/2008/08-27/1362878.shtml, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at http://www.csrc.gov.cn/pub/csrc_en/laws/overRule/Decrees/200910/t20091028_166902.htm, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  10. 10.

    See also the ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section IV. E. Comment 1, p. 10.

  11. 11.

    See Choong/Huckerby, 7/1 asialaw 41, 42 (2009); Taylor, 23/8 CLP 26, 27 (2009).

  12. 12.

    Fosh et al., in: Johnston (ed.), Competition Law in China and Hong Kong, 2009, p. 97, 120; Mulrenan, 23/3 CLP 8, 10 (2009).

  13. 13.

    In the EU, pre-filing discussions may also pertain to substantive issues relevant for the review procedure; see Zeise, in: Schulte (ed.), Handbuch Fusionskontrolle, 2010, para. 1906.

  14. 14.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “Workshop on China’s Anti-Monopoly Law and Enforcement” held by ABA Section of Antitrust Law on 1 April 2011, video of speech available at http://www.americanbar.org/groups/antitrust_law/events_cle/china_workshop.html, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  15. 15.

    Meyer/Chen, Z., RIW 2009, 265, 271. Further, it should be noted that officials involved in the pre-filing process may differ from the ones to review the merger at a later stage and are hence not in a position to make substantial comments; see Taylor, 23/8 CLP 26, 27 (2009).

  16. 16.

    See Interview with the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming), The Antitrust Source, February 2011, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/2011_build/antitrust_law/feb11_shangintrvw2_23f.authcheckdam.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 1.

  17. 17.

    Ning/Zheng/Ng, Observations re merger control, 2010, http://www.chinalawinsight.com/2010/12/articles/corporate/antitrust-competition/observations-re-the-merger-control-regime-in-china/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  18. 18.

    The reporting party wishing to withdraw its notification after MOFCOM has opened a case but prior to it rendering its review decision has to submit a written application and state the reasons for the designated withdrawal. If the concentration transaction is abandoned, the withdrawal does not need to be approved by MOFCOM. If, however, the transaction is not abandoned but shall still be implemented (e.g., a significant change of the transaction plan makes the concentration to fall below the notification thresholds; see Section 7(1) AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures), the withdrawal is subject to the examination and consent of MOFCOM. In case an abandoned merger is later resurrected, such merger is to be considered as a new concentration transaction, giving rise to a new filing procedure.

  19. 19.

    MOFCOM, Western Digital/Hitachi, para. 3.

  20. 20.

    See, for instance, MOFCOM, MediaTek/MStar, para. 2.

  21. 21.

    Bachrack/Huang/Modrall, 36/4 CBR 18, 19 (2009); Meyer/Chen, Z., RIW 2009, 265, 270 et seq.

  22. 22.

    Furse, Antitrust Law in China, 2009, p. 103.

  23. 23.

    Harris et al., Anti-Monopoly Law, 2011, p. 147.

  24. 24.

    NPC Standing Committee Legislative Affairs Commission, Office for Economic Law (ed.), Commentary on AML (in Chinese), 2007, p. 144.

  25. 25.

    See, for instance, Article 4(1)(2) ECMR, which permits concentrations to be notified once there is a good faith intention to conclude an agreement or where a public bid has been announced.

  26. 26.

    ABA, Section of Antitrust Law and Section of International Law (eds.), Comments on Draft Notification Rules March 2008, 2008, http://apps.americanbar.org/intlaw/leadership/policy/abaprcscmergernotificationregcommentdraftfinalcommentscombo.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 5 et seq.

  27. 27.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section III. A., p. 5.

  28. 28.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section III. A. Comment 1 and 2, p. 5.

  29. 29.

    Taylor, 23/1 CLP 3 (2009).

  30. 30.

    See Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) answering questions by journalists regarding certain issues in the anti-monopoly review of concentrations of business operators, 21 November 2008, available at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/zcfb/200812/20081205935637.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  31. 31.

    See also the ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section III. B. Comment 1, p. 6, where the ICN recommends jurisdictions that prohibit closing, while the competition agency reviews the transaction not to impose any deadlines for pre-merger notification, since the parties will have the incentive to file promptly after reaching the merger agreement, in order to receive early clearance and to consummate the transaction accordingly.

  32. 32.

    Hui, 23/2 CLP 23 (2009).

  33. 33.

    See Section 3(1) AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures.

  34. 34.

    See Article 3 Documents Opinion.

  35. 35.

    It has been indicated that business operators need to assess the relevant markets in depth even in cases with no horizontal or vertical relationships between the merging parties; see Emch, 32 E.C.L.R. 132, 139 (2011).

  36. 36.

    See Article 5 No. (4) Documents Opinion.

  37. 37.

    See Article 9 Documents Opinion.

  38. 38.

    Consequently, the notification parties should, in their own interest, critically review drafting of such internal documents from the earliest stages of the transaction; see Reysen, 8/2 Competition Law Insight 8, 9 (2009).

  39. 39.

    Fosh et al., in: Johnston (ed.), Competition Law in China and Hong Kong, 2009, p. 97, 119; Hui, 23/2 CLP 23 (2009); Wei, J., Recent Developments, 2009, http://www.hoganlovells.de/files/Publication/c8a94e57-6e97-49b9-857c-ce6715882b6b/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/e41ba66f-26e4-472e-9002-d04bc7ae5e82/Wei_Apr_09.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 6.

  40. 40.

    On 3 April 2013, MOFCOM published a consultation draft for “Interim Provisions on Applicable Standards for Simple Cases of Business Operator Concentrations”. This draft document sets out the standards for identifying simple merger cases but does not address how these cases will be treated. However, the publication of this draft document suggests that MOFCOM may consider introducing specific procedural rules for simple merger cases.

  41. 41.

    Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 55 (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  42. 42.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section VI. E. Comment 1, p. 16.

  43. 43.

    See Yang, D., Report on Symposium on Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, 2009, http://cms40.legaldaily.com.cn:7001/servlet/PagePreviewServlet?siteid=4&nodeid=7574&articleid=1060323&type=1 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014, referring to Wang Xiaoye.

  44. 44.

    Bachrack/Huang/Modrall, 36/4 CBR 18, 19 (2009); Wei, J., Recent Developments, 2009, http://www.hoganlovells.de/files/Publication/c8a94e57-6e97-49b9-857c-ce6715882b6b/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/e41ba66f-26e4-472e-9002-d04bc7ae5e82/Wei_Apr_09.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 9. MOFCOM is reportedly willing to discuss the type and volume of information to be supplied; see Reysen, 8/2 Competition Law Insight 8, 9 (2009).

  45. 45.

    MOFCOM, Uralkali/Silvinit, para. 3.

  46. 46.

    Wei, J., 35/4 CBR 52, 55 (2008).

  47. 47.

    ABA, Section of Antitrust Law and Section of International Law (eds.), Comments on Draft Notification Rules March 2008, 2008, http://apps.americanbar.org/intlaw/leadership/policy/abaprcscmergernotificationregcommentdraftfinalcommentscombo.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 13.

  48. 48.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section V. D. Comment 1, p. 13 and section VI. E. Comment 4, p. 17.

  49. 49.

    See also the ICN Report on the Costs and Burdens of Multijurisdictional Merger Review, November 2004, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc332.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 14 et seq.

  50. 50.

    The confidentiality protection covers materials and information provided not only by the reporting parties but also by all third parties since the only precondition for the protection is that MOFCOM has learnt of the information in the course of merger review.

  51. 51.

    It is, however, not clear whether materials shall be treated as confidential as long as they are deemed to be confidential by the parties or whether it is in the discretion of MOFCOM to determine which materials are confidential and, in the latter case, which standards would apply for such discretion; see Bachrack/Huang/Modrall, 36/4 CBR 18, 19 (2009); Lorenz, China Contact 2008, 31, 32.

  52. 52.

    See Chen, Z., Probleme der europäischen Fusionskontrolle, 2008, p. 376, in an outlook on Chinese competition law.

  53. 53.

    See Section 4(3) AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures.

  54. 54.

    See Section 5(2) AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures.

  55. 55.

    Fosh et al., in: Johnston (ed.), Competition Law in China and Hong Kong, 2009, p. 97, 119; Hui, 23/2 CLP 23 (2009); see also Press Conference on AML Implementation Issues hosted by MOFCOM on 12 August 2010, http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/ai/201008/20100807078063.html?4245233051=4123207458 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014, at which the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) has pointed out that MOFCOM may “constantly” ask for supplementary filings in order to complete the notification and open a case.

  56. 56.

    Wang, P./Evrard/Zhang, Y., Three Years of Antitrust Enforcement in China, 2011, http://www.jonesday.com/looking_back/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  57. 57.

    See ABA, Section of Antitrust Law and Section of International Law (eds.), Comments on Draft Notification Rules March 2008, 2008, http://apps.americanbar.org/intlaw/leadership/policy/abaprcscmergernotificationregcommentdraftfinalcommentscombo.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 7 et seq.

  58. 58.

    ABA, Section of Antitrust Law and Section of International Law (eds.), Comments on Draft Notification Rules March 2008, 2008, http://apps.americanbar.org/intlaw/leadership/policy/abaprcscmergernotificationregcommentdraftfinalcommentscombo.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 8; see also the ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section IV. C. Comment 3, p. 9, in which it is proposed that “competition agencies should seek to consolidate information requests in order to increase the predictability of the anticipated duration of the waiting period”.

  59. 59.

    MOFCOM, InBev/AB, para. 2; MOFCOM, Mitsubishi Rayon/Lucite, para. 2; MOFCOM, Alpha V/Savio, para. 2; MOFCOM, GE China/Shenhua, para. 2; MOFCOM, Seagate/Samsung, para. 2; MOFCOM, Henkel HK/Tiande, para. 2; MOFCOM, Western Digital/Hitachi, para. 2; MOFCOM, Google/Motorola Mobility, para. 2; MOFCOM, UTC/Goodrich, para. 2; MOFCOM, Wal-Mart/Yihaodian, para. 2; MOFCOM, ARM/G&D/Gemalto, para. 2; MOFCOM, Glencore/Xstrata, para. 2; MOFCOM, Marubeni/Gavilon, para. 2; MOFCOM, Baxter/Gambro, para. 2; MOFCOM, MediaTek/MStar, para. 2.

  60. 60.

    MOFCOM, Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, para. 2.

  61. 61.

    MOFCOM, Panasonic/Sanyo, para. 2.

  62. 62.

    MOFCOM, Pfizer/Wyeth, para. 2.

  63. 63.

    MOFCOM, GM/Delphi, para. 2.

  64. 64.

    NPC Standing Committee Legislative Affairs Commission, Office for Economic Law (ed.), Commentary on AML (in Chinese), 2007, p. 166.

  65. 65.

    Mulrenan, 23/3 CLP 8, 10 (2009); Wang, P./Zhang, Y., in: GCR (ed.), The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review 2010, http://www.globalcompetitionreview.com/reviews/25/sections/90/chapters/943/china-merger-control, last accessed 12 January 2014; Wu, Z., 75 Antitrust L. J. 73, 90 (2008–2009). See, however, Chen, Z., Probleme der europäischen Fusionskontrolle, 2008, p. 375, in an outlook on Chinese competition law, who proposes to adopt a calculation based on business days, since such approach would be more accurate.

  66. 66.

    It is to be noted that, in contrast to other jurisdictions, there are no stand-still or suspension provisions in the Chinese merger review framework, so that the process will, in any case, terminate after 180 days at the latest. See also speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “International Symposium on the Enforcement of the AML in the New Economy” held at the Renmin University of China on 18 December 2010, http://www.antimonopolylaw.org/article/default.asp?id=3227 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  67. 67.

    MOFCOM, Glencore/Xstrata, para. 2.

  68. 68.

    MOFCOM, Marubeni/Gavilon, para. 2.

  69. 69.

    MOFCOM, MediaTek/MStar, para. 2.

  70. 70.

    Ning/Yin, 240 Merger Control Cases Cleared, 2011, http://www.chinalawinsight.com/2011/06/articles/corporate/antitrust-competition/240-merger-control-cases-cleared-by-mofcom-thus-far/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  71. 71.

    See Press Conference on Main Issues of AML Implementation in 2011 hosted by MOFCOM on 27 December 2011, http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/slfw/201112/20111207901483.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  72. 72.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “International Symposium on the Enforcement of the AML in the New Economy” held at the Renmin University of China on 18 December 2010, http://www.antimonopolylaw.org/article/default.asp?id=3227 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  73. 73.

    See European Commission Merger Statistics, 21 September 1990 to 31 January 2012, available at http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/statistics.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  74. 74.

    NPC Standing Committee Legislative Affairs Commission, Office for Economic Law (ed.), Commentary on AML (in Chinese), 2007, p. 152.

  75. 75.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “Workshop on China’s Anti-Monopoly Law and Enforcement” held by ABA Section of Antitrust Law on 1 April 2011, video of speech available at http://www.americanbar.org/groups/antitrust_law/events_cle/china_workshop.html, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  76. 76.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “International Symposium on the Enforcement of the AML in the New Economy” held at the Renmin University of China on 18 December 2010, http://www.antimonopolylaw.org/article/default.asp?id=3227 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  77. 77.

    In 2011, the number of filings (194 in total) increased by 43 percent, compared to that in 2010; see Press Conference on Main Issues of AML Implementation in 2011 hosted by MOFCOM on 27 December 2011, http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/slfw/201112/20111207901483.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  78. 78.

    See Press Conference on AML Implementation Issues hosted by MOFCOM on 12 August 2010, http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/ai/201008/20100807078063.html?4245233051=4123207458 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  79. 79.

    It is to be noted, however, that MOFCOM is not required by law to consult with or seek the opinions of other stakeholders.

  80. 80.

    Ning/Zheng/Ng, Observations re merger control, 2010, http://www.chinalawinsight.com/2010/12/articles/corporate/antitrust-competition/observations-re-the-merger-control-regime-in-china/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  81. 81.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “International Symposium on the Enforcement of the AML in the New Economy” held at the Renmin University of China on 18 December 2010, http://www.antimonopolylaw.org/article/default.asp?id=3227 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  82. 82.

    See MOFCOM’s press release of 14 September 2011 at http://fldj.mofcom.gov.cn/aarticle/tpxw/201109/20110907739163.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014. MOFCOM or AMB may set up relevant legal instruments in the course of 2012; see Press Conference on Main Issues of AML Implementation in 2011 hosted by MOFCOM on 27 December 2011, http://www.MOFCOM.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/slfw/201112/20111207901483.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  83. 83.

    See Section 8(1) AMB Interpretation on Reporting and Review Measures.

  84. 84.

    Johnston, in: Johnston (ed.), Competition Law in China and Hong Kong, 2009, p. 37, 55, rightly notes that the right to make a statement is the only express procedural right, other than the right to confidentiality of trade secrets, that is granted to business operators by the AML.

  85. 85.

    See Taylor, 23/8 CLP 26, 28 (2009).

  86. 86.

    Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 55 et seq. (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  87. 87.

    In the draft form, Article 10 Review Measures only stipulated that MOFCOM “may” inform the parties of its opposition, hereby installing a discretionary option for MOFCOM to inform the parties; see Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 56 (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  88. 88.

    Wu, L., 33 World Competition 477, 484 (2010).

  89. 89.

    Wu, L., 33 World Competition 477, 484 (2010); in effect, MOFCOM’s practice appears to be to express its concerns orally, rather than issuing a formal statement of objections, Harris et al., Anti-Monopoly Law, 2011, p. 150.

  90. 90.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section VII. B. Comment 2, p. 20.

  91. 91.

    See Interview with the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming), The Antitrust Source, February 2009, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/antitrust_source/Feb09_ShangIntrvw2_26f.authcheckdam.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 5.

  92. 92.

    There are a number of statutory measures to protect confidentiality of the merging parties’ business information. Article 7(4) Review Measures stipulates that hearings in camera may be arranged so as to protect trade secrets and other confidential information of participants. Moreover, Article 16 Review Measures subjects MOFCOM, the reporting party, and other work units and individuals to an obligation of confidentiality in respect of trade secrets and other confidential information learnt during the review of a concentration of business operators.

  93. 93.

    Accordingly, MOFCOM officials have indicated that the extent of the consultation process may vary from case to case; see Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  94. 94.

    MOFCOM, Mitsubishi Rayon/Lucite, para. 4 (the decision, however, did not explicitly mention that any government authorities had also been consulted); MOFCOM, Pfizer/Wyeth, para. 4; MOFCOM, Novartis/Alcon, para. 4; MOFCOM, Uralkali/Silvinit, para. 4; MOFCOM, Alpha V/Savio, para. 4; MOFCOM, GE China/Shenhua, para. 4; MOFCOM, Seagate/Samsung, para. 4; MOFCOM, Henkel HK/Tiande, para. 4; MOFCOM, Western Digital/Hitachi, para. 4; MOFCOM, Google/Motorola Mobility, para. 4; MOFCOM, UTC/Goodrich, para. 4; MOFCOM, Wal-Mart/Yihaodian, para. 4; MOFCOM, ARM/G&D/Gemalto, para. 4; MOFCOM, Glencore/Xstrata, para. 3; MOFCOM, Marubeni/Gavilon, para. 3; MOFCOM, Baxter/Gambro, para. 3; MOFCOM, MediaTek/MStar, para. 3.

  95. 95.

    See, for instance, MOFCOM, Novartis/Alcon, para. 4; MOFCOM, Uralkali/Silvinit, para. 4; MOFCOM, Seagate/Samsung, para. 4; MOFCOM, Henkel HK/Tiande, para. 4; MOFCOM, Western Digital/Hitachi, para. 4; MOFCOM, UTC/Goodrich, para. 4; MOFCOM, Marubeni/Gavilon, para. 3; MOFCOM, Baxter/Gambro, para. 3.

  96. 96.

    MOFCOM, Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, para. 4.

  97. 97.

    MOFCOM, Panasonic/Sanyo, para. 4.

  98. 98.

    See Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 55 (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  99. 99.

    Deng/Emch/Leonard, A Hard Landing in the Soft Drink Market, 2009, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1396968, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 16. MOFCOM officials have emphasised that third parties are heard for information-gathering purposes only; it would be MOFCOM only that in the end makes the final decisions; see Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  100. 100.

    MOFCOM, Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, Press Release, para. 3.

  101. 101.

    See Yang, D., Report on Symposium on Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, 2009, http://cms40.legaldaily.com.cn:7001/servlet/PagePreviewServlet?siteid=4&nodeid=7574&articleid=1060323&type=1 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014, referring to Yao Haifang.

  102. 102.

    Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  103. 103.

    Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  104. 104.

    Bush/Bo, Disentangling Industrial Policy and Competition Policy, 2011, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/2011_build/antitrust_law/feb11_bush2_23f.authcheckdam.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 11.

  105. 105.

    Taylor, 23/8 CLP 26, 29 (2009).

  106. 106.

    Han/French/Carnabuci, MOFCOM conditionally clears two offshore acquisitions, 2009, http://www.freshfields.com/publications/pdfs/2009/oct09/26807.pdf, last accessed 3 March 2011, p. 2; Taylor, 23/8 CLP 6, 6 (2009); Wang/Zhang, in: GCR (ed.), The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review 2010, http://www.globalcompetitionreview.com/reviews/25/sections/90/chapters/943/china-merger-control, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  107. 107.

    Han/French/Carnabuci, MOFCOM conditionally clears two offshore acquisitions, 2009, http://www.freshfields.com/publications/pdfs/2009/oct09/26807.pdf, last accessed 3 March 2011, p. 2.

  108. 108.

    See Masoudi, Key Issues Regarding China’s Antimonopoly Legislation, 2006, http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/speeches/217612.htm, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  109. 109.

    Drexl, in: Drexl/Kerber/Podszun (eds.), Competition Policy and the Economic Approach, 2011, p. 312, 326.

  110. 110.

    Ning/Zheng/Ng, Observations re merger control, 2010, http://www.chinalawinsight.com/2010/12/articles/corporate/antitrust-competition/observations-re-the-merger-control-regime-in-china/, last accessed 12 January 2014; Wang, P./Evrard/Zhang, Y., Three Years of Antitrust Enforcement in China, 2011, http://www.jonesday.com/looking_back/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  111. 111.

    Deng/Emch/Leonard, A Hard Landing in the Soft Drink Market, 2009, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1396968, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 16.

  112. 112.

    Ning/Zheng/Ng, Observations re merger control, 2010, http://www.chinalawinsight.com/2010/12/articles/corporate/antitrust-competition/observations-re-the-merger-control-regime-in-china/, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  113. 113.

    See speech delivered by the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming) at the “International Symposium on the Enforcement of the AML in the New Economy” held at the Renmin University of China on 18 December 2010, http://www.antimonopolylaw.org/article/default.asp?id=3227 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  114. 114.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section VI. E. Comment 1, p. 16.

  115. 115.

    Bachrack/Huang/Modrall, 36/4 CBR 18, 26 (2009); Fosh et al., in: Johnston (ed.), Competition Law in China and Hong Kong, 2009, p. 97, 120.

  116. 116.

    Furse, 31 E.C.L.R. 98, 101 (2010).

  117. 117.

    These details were only disclosed during a Q&A session following the publication of the prohibition decision; see MOFCOM, Coca-Cola/Huiyuan, Q&A, para. 16 et seq.

  118. 118.

    Ha et al., China Antitrust Moves Up a Gear, 2011, http://www.mayerbrown.com/publications/article.asp?id=11808&nid=6, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  119. 119.

    Furse, 31 E.C.L.R. 98, 104 (2010); Masseli, ZChinR 2009, 18, 30.

  120. 120.

    Mulrenan, 23/3 CLP 8, 10 (2009). See, however, Bu, IIC 2010, 202, 203, and Deng/Emch/Leonard, A Hard Landing in the Soft Drink Market, 2009, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1396968, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 4, who argue that the AML would require MOFCOM to publish substantiated decisions that go beyond the form of a simple summary of its findings.

  121. 121.

    Deng/Emch/Leonard, A Hard Landing in the Soft Drink Market, 2009, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1396968, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 4.

  122. 122.

    Bush, Oracle Bones, 2009, http://www.abanet.org/antitrust/at-source/09/08/Aug09-Bush8-12f.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 5; Meyer/Chen, Z., RIW 2009, 265, 271; Zhang, A., The enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law, 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1783037, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 25.

  123. 123.

    Fang, Predictability and Transparency, 2008, http://www.asiancompetitionforum.org/docman/power-point-slides-2.html, last accessed 12 January 2014; Farmer, 18 Tulane J. of Int’l & Comp. Law 1, 46 (2009), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1411727, last accessed 12 January 2014; Wang, X., in: Wang, X. (ed.), Wang Xiaoye on the Antitrust Law (in Chinese), 2010, p. 326, 337.

  124. 124.

    It is not known which form the communication of unconditional approvals takes and whether the outcome is explained to the business operators. At least in the early days of the AML’s enforcement, MOFCOM used to communicate the outcome orally only, without offering any additional guidance on its reasoning; see Mulrenan/Young/Mak, 22/10 CLP 4, 5 (2008).

  125. 125.

    See Press Conference on AML Implementation Issues hosted by MOFCOM on 12 August 2010, http://www.MOFCOM.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/ai/201008/20100807078063.html?4245233051=4123207458 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  126. 126.

    NPC Standing Committee Legislative Affairs Commission, Office for Economic Law (ed.), Commentary on AML (in Chinese), 2007, p. 207.

  127. 127.

    Wang, X., in: Wang, X. (ed.), Wang Xiaoye on the Antitrust Law (in Chinese), 2010, p. 326, 337.

  128. 128.

    See Chen, Z., Probleme der europäischen Fusionskontrolle, 2008, p. 377, in an outlook on Chinese competition law.

  129. 129.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section VIII. C. Comment 2, p. 23.

  130. 130.

    Owen/Sun, S./Zheng, 75 Antitrust L. J. 231, 263 (2008–2009), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1483273, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  131. 131.

    ICN Recommended Practices for Merger Notification Procedures, available at http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, at section XII. C. Comment 2, p. 36. See also Zhang, A., The enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law, 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1783037, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 25 et seq., who proposes that MOFCOM should at least publish a brief notice promptly after a transaction has been notified.

  132. 132.

    See Wei, J./Marshall/Gong, China Antitrust Update (Conditional clearances), 2009, http://www.hoganlovells.com/files/Publication/fdec804c-b204-41cf-a1d9-167c4c43d213/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/98aee318-771e-4541-bcb3-1937f8db8355/ChinaUpdate.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 1.

  133. 133.

    NPC Standing Committee Legislative Affairs Commission, Office for Economic Law (ed.), Commentary on AML (in Chinese), 2007, p. 207.

  134. 134.

    未依法申报经营者集中调查处理暂行办法, see Chinese version at http://fldj.MOFCOM.gov.cn/aarticle/zcfb/201201/20120107921682.html, last accessed 12 January 2014, English translation at 26/1 CLP 38-41 (2012).

  135. 135.

    See, for instance, Ha et al., Penalties Now Likely, 2012, http://www.mayerbrown.com/publications/article.asp?id=12070&nid=6, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  136. 136.

    See Press Conference on Main Issues of AML Implementation in 2011 hosted by MOFCOM on 27 December 2011, http://www.MOFCOM.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/slfw/201112/20111207901483.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  137. 137.

    See Han/Pfromm, in: Fine, Frank L. (ed.), China Institute of International Antitrust and Investment, First Annual Antitrust Symposium 2013, 2013, p. 167, 174.

  138. 138.

    Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 56 (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014; Wang, P./Zhang, Y., in: GCR (ed.), The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review 2010, http://www.globalcompetitionreview.com/reviews/25/sections/90/chapters/943/china-merger-control, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  139. 139.

    Wu, Z., 75 Antitrust L. J. 73, 106 (2008–2009).

  140. 140.

    Such “relevant place” may include private homes of executive directors; see Mao/Glass, GRUR Int. 2008, 105, 111; Nicholson, 6/3 asialaw 34, 38 (2008).

  141. 141.

    Mitnick/Chen, Y./Emch, 23/3 Antitrust Magazine 53, 56 (2009), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1440795&rec=1&srcabs=1439765, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  142. 142.

    Ha et al., Penalties Now Likely, 2012, http://www.mayerbrown.com/publications/article.asp?id=12070&nid=6, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  143. 143.

    The penalties can be imposed in three situations: (i) merging parties implemented the merger without notification, (ii) merging parties implemented the merger without having received clearance, and (iii) merging parties gained clearance of the merger only by submitting false information to MOFCOM; see Wang, X., in: Wang, X. (ed.), Wang Xiaoye on the Antitrust Law (in Chinese), 2010, p. 326, 342.

  144. 144.

    Wang, P./Harris/Zhang, Y., AML, 2007, http://jonesday.com/newsknowledge/publicationdetail.aspx?publication=4662, last accessed 12 January 2014; Wang, X., in: Wang, X. (ed.), Wang Xiaoye on the Antitrust Law (in Chinese), 2010, p. 326, 342; Wei, D., 14 J. Int. Econ. L. 807, 840 (2011).

  145. 145.

    Nicholson, 6/3 asialaw 34, 36 (2008).

  146. 146.

    Before imposing any penalties, MOFCOM shall inform the business operators of the outcome of the investigation and the facts and evidence on which the decision is based, after which the business operators shall submit their written response (Article 14 Interim Investigation Measures).

  147. 147.

    See Interview with the Director General of the AMB (Shang Ming), The Antitrust Source, February 2009, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/antitrust_source/Feb09_ShangIntrvw2_26f.authcheckdam.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 7.

  148. 148.

    中华人民共和国行政强制法, see Chinese version at http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2011-07/01/content_1897308.htm, last accessed 26 January 2012.

  149. 149.

    Administrative enforcement measures are taken when a citizen, legal entity, or any other organisation does not perform the obligations imposed by a relevant administrative decision, Article 2(3) Administrative Coercion Law.

  150. 150.

    Zhang, A., The enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law, 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1783037, last accessed 12 January 2014, p. 22.

  151. 151.

    Mao (CASS), Interview on 25 October 2011 and Zhu and Sun (AMB), Interview on 27 October 2011.

  152. 152.

    Wang, X., 75 Antitrust L. J. 133, 146 (2008–2009).

  153. 153.

    Owen/Sun, S./Zheng, 75 Antitrust L. J. 231, 261 (2008–2009), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1483273, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  154. 154.

    Wang, X./Su, in: Zimmer (ed.), The Goals of Competition Law, 2012, p. 379, 395; see also Unirule Institute of Economics (ed.), Report on “the Nature, Performance and Reform of State-owned Enterprises”, 2011, English report abstract at http://english.unirule.org.cn/Html/Unirule-News/20110308200838427.html, last accessed 12 January 2014.

  155. 155.

    Wang, B., MOFCOM: China Unicom/China Netcom merger suspected of violating AML, The Economic Observer, 1 May 2009, http://tech.163.com/09/0501/10/587JON9U000915BE.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

  156. 156.

    See Wang, B., MOFCOM: China Unicom/China Netcom merger suspected of violating AML, The Economic Observer, 1 May 2009, http://tech.163.com/09/0501/10/587JON9U000915BE.html (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014, who notes that most of the authorities supervising large SOEs are situated at ministerial level.

  157. 157.

    Wang, X./Su, in: Zimmer (ed.), The Goals of Competition Law, 2012, p. 379, 391 et seq.

  158. 158.

    See Press Conference on AML Implementation Issues hosted by MOFCOM on 12 August 2010, http://www.MOFCOM.gov.cn/aarticle/ae/ai/201008/20100807078063.html?4245233051=4123207458 (in Chinese), last accessed 12 January 2014.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Munich, Germany

    Tingting Weinreich-Zhao

Authors
  1. Tingting Weinreich-Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Weinreich-Zhao, T. (2015). Merger Review Procedure. In: Chinese Merger Control Law. Munich Studies on Innovation and Competition, vol 2. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43868-8_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation