Abstract

Most states have a national anti-trust or competition law to regulate anti-competitive activities. There is no doubt that, in purely domestic cases, where an anti-competitive activity and its anti-competitive effects have occurred within a state, that state’s national competition authority can regulate the activity by applying its competition law. For cross-border cases such as where anti-competitive activities are carried out abroad but have anti-competitive effects on the domestic or internal market of that state or region, it has been gradually accepted that a state can apply its competition law to the activities on the basis of the effects within its territory. However, it should be noted that states have approached such cases differently. In 2017, the Supreme Court of Japan first decided the international scope of the Japanese Anti-Monopoly Act (JAMA) in cross-border cartel cases and clarified that the JAMA could apply to anti-competitive activities conducted outside of Japan if the activities in question disturbed the free competition economic order of Japan. The court did not mention the effects doctrine or the territorial principle. This article examines on what grounds and how far the JAMA can and should apply to cross-border cartel cases by analysing the Supreme Court judgement.

中文翻译：

---

《日本反垄断法》在跨境卡特尔案件中的国际范围：日本对“域外适用”的态度

摘要

大多数州都有国家反托拉斯法或竞争法来规范反竞争活动。毫无疑问，在一个纯粹的国内案例中，一个州内发生了反竞争活动及其反竞争效果，该州的国家竞争管理机构可以通过应用竞争法来规范该活动。对于跨境案件，例如在国外进行反竞争活动但对该州或地区的国内或内部市场产生反竞争影响的国家，已经逐渐接受一个州可以将其竞争法适用于该活动。根据其领土内的影响。但是，应该指出的是，各州对待此类案件的方式有所不同。在2017年，日本最高法院首先确定了《日本反垄断法》（JAMA）在跨境卡特尔案件中的国际范围，并澄清说，如果有关活动干扰了自由贸易，则JAMA可以适用于在日本境外进行的反竞争活动。日本竞争经济秩序。法院没有提及效果学说或领土原则。本文通过分析最高法院的判决，研究了JAMA可以在多大程度上适用于跨境卡特尔案件的依据以及在多大程度上适用。