Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"This book is an effort to consolidate several different perspectives on antitrust law. First, Professor Hylton presents a detailed description of the law as it has developed through numerous judicial opinions. Second, the author presents detailed economic critiques of the judicialopinions, drawing heavily on the literature in law and economics journals. Third, Professor Hylton integrates a jurisprudential perspective into the analysis that looks at antitrust as a vibrant field of common law. This last perspective leads the author to address issues of stabilityand predictability in antitrust law and to examine the pressures shaping its evolution. The combination of these three perspectives offers something new to every student of antitrust law. Specific topics covered include perfect competition versus monopoly, enforcement, cartels, Section 1 doctrine, rule of reason analysis, boycotts, marketpower, vertical restraints, tying, exclusive dealing, and horizontal mergers. Keith N. Hylton has taught at the School of Law of Boston University since 1995. He previously served on the faculty at NorthwesternUniversity School of Law. Professor Hylton currently teaches courses in antitrust, torts, and labor law, and he writes widely in the field of law and economics, with more than forty publications in American law journals and peer-reviewed law and economics journals. Professor Hylton has also served as a director of the American Law and Economics Association."

"Salah satu pengaturan di dalam hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia adalah mengenai perjanjian yang dilarang, dimana pelaku usaha dilarang untuk melakukan perjanjian atau kesepakatan dengan pelaku usaha lain karena dapat menimbulkan distorsi terhadap persaingan di pasar. Dalam praktiknya, karena semakin sulitnya membuktikan adanya perjanjian tertulis, berkembang sebuah bukti tidak langsung atau bukti petunjuk (bukti komunikasi dan/atau bukti ekonomi), untuk membuktikan adanya perjanjian tidak tertulis dalam perkara perjanjian yang dilarang. Di dalam hukum persaingan usaha, dikenal konsep ekonomi price parallelism, yang menggambarkan kondisi penetapan harga di antara pelaku usaha, tetapi tidak didasarkan pada perjanjian atau kolusi secara sadar di antara pelaku usaha, melainkan murni karena keputusan independen para pelaku usaha sehingga tidak melanggar hukum persaingan usaha. Meskipun demikian, adanya price parallelism di antara pelaku usaha tidak menutup kemungkinan adanya perjanjian tidak tertulis di antara pelaku usaha sehingga dapat melanggar ketentuan di dalam perjanjian yang dilarang. Oleh karena itu, konsep price parallelism dapat dijadikan sebagai bukti ekonomi, tetapi terdapat sebab-sebab tertentu yang menentukan keberlakuannya sebagai bukti ekonomi. Fokus utama dalam skripsi ini adalah untuk menganalisis bagaimana hubungan price parallelism dengan hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia dan keberlakuannya sebagai bukti ekonomi di dalam hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia. Dengan metode penelitian doktriner yang bersifat deskriptif, didapatkan hasil bahwa untuk menentukan hubungan price parallelism dengan hukum persaingan usaha harus didasarkan pada fakta ada atau tidaknya perjanjian di antara pelaku usaha yang menyebabkan terjadinya price parallelism. Sementara itu, untuk menentukan keberlakuan price parallelism sebagai bukti ekonomi harus didahului dengan analisis tambahan untuk melihat ada atau tidaknya perjanjian di antara pelaku usaha, dan/atau untuk melihat independensi para pelaku usaha yang terlibat dalam price parallelism, dan/atau untuk melihat ada atau tidaknya faktor-faktor lain yang menyebabkan terjadinya price parallelism.

---

Indonesian antitrust law regulates the provisions of prohibited agreements, where companies are prohibited from entering into agreement or arrangements with other companies as it may cause distortions to the competitive market. As it becomes increasingly difficult to prove the existence of a written agreement, indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence (communication evidence and/or economic evidence) is being used to evidence the unwritten agreement in the case of prohibited agreements. In antitrust law, it is known the economic concept of price parallelism, depicting the condition of price fixing among companies, without the existence of conscious agreement or collusion, rather an independent decision of each companies, thus not violating the antitrust law. The existence of price parallelism, however, may not rule out the involvement of unwritten agreements among companies, leading to violations of the provisions of prohibited agreements. Consequently, price parallelism can be used as an economic evidence, but there are certain causes which determine its validity as an economic evidence. In this thesis, the primary focus is to analyze the relevance of price parallelism to the Indonesian antitrust law and its validity as economic evidence in the Indonesian antitrust law. Using the method of descriptive doctrinaire research, the results show that in determining the relevance of price parallelism to the Indonesian antitrust law is dependent on whether or not there were agreements among companies that led to price parallelism. Meanwhile, to ensure the validity of price parallelism as economic evidence must be preceded with factor-plus analysis to determine whether or not there were agreements among companies, and/or to determine the independence of each companies involved in price parallelism, and/or to determine whether or not there were other factors that could cause price parallelism."