Previous business/academic article Next business/academic article
Academic Articles Awards > Asian Antitrust

Regulating abuse of superior bargaining position under the Japanese competition law: an anomaly or a necessity?

Masako Wakui and Thomas K. Cheng, J Antitrust Enforcement (2015) 3 (2): 302-333.

See Thomas K. Cheng's resume See Masako Wakui's resume

Vote for this articleHelp

* Average
** Interesting
*** Good
**** Excellent
***** Must receive an Award!

Please note that the star(s) appearing on the article page before you have voted reflect the status of all votes registered to date.

Readers’ vote will close on February 15, 2016. Readers’ vote will allow you to nominate 1 article for each of the Awards, i.e., 10 Academic articles, 10 Business articles, and the best Soft Laws. The readers’ short-list of Academic and Business Articles will be communicated to the Board together with the 20 articles nominated by the Steering Committees. The Board will decide on the award-winning articles. Results will be announced at the Awards ceremony to take place in Washington DC on the eve of the ABA Antitrust Spring Meeting on April 5, 2016.

Abuse of superior bargaining position has long been a controversial area of Japanese competition law. Even though it is by no means unique to Japan—Korea, Taiwan, France, and Germany among others also have similar regulation—Japan’s abuse regulation has tended to attract more attention globally. One of the main sources of controversy for abuse regulation is whether it is consistent with competition law, and whether it serves any useful economic purpose. This article attempts to address this long-standing debate by examining whether abuse regulation is consistent with the various objectives of competition law and other economic rationales. Having determined that these objectives and rationales provide at best tenuous justifications for abuse regulation, or are inconsistent with the Japan Fair Trade Commission’s current enforcement practices, it proceeds to argue that abuse regulation can be best justified as a supplement to deficient contract law enforcement, which many commentators have noted is particularly serious for small- and medium-sized enterprises in Japan.

Download our brochure