Recently, the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration issued the Decision on Administrative Penalty for the Monopoly Agreement of Shanxi Construction Supervision Association (hereinafter referred to as the Decision). According to
the Decision, the Shanxi Provincial Market Supervision and Administration Bureau filed an investigation into the suspected monopoly agreement of the Shanxi Provincial Construction Supervision Association in January 2021. In March 2026, the Shanxi Provincial Market Supervision and Administration made a decision on administrative penalties according to law. In October
2020, the Shanxi Provincial Market Supervision and Administration Bureau found in its supervision and inspection that on April 26, 2018, The parties concerned (Shanxi Construction Supervision Association) jointly issued the Charging Rules for Engineering Supervision Services in Shanxi Province (hereinafter referred to as the Charging Rules) by Shanxi Construction Cost Management Association and Shanxi Construction Industry Association Construction Project Bidding Branch.
The Billing Rules stipulate the standard price level and price change range of the engineering supervision service industry, and specify the disciplinary measures, which are suspected of constituting a monopoly agreement. After necessary investigation, the Shanxi Provincial Market Supervision and Administration decided on January 12, 2021 to file a case against the parties suspected of organizing the operators of the industry to reach a monopoly agreement, and to file the case with the General Administration of Market Supervision in accordance with the regulations. During this period, the Shanxi Provincial Market Supervision and Administration conducted an investigation and inquiry on the parties concerned, extracted relevant evidence materials, adopted a combination of direct investigation and entrusted investigation by prefectural and municipal bureaus, investigated and collected evidence from members of the association and some bidding agencies, organized case handlers to conduct in-depth analysis of the evidence materials in the case, and listened to the parties many times. Protect the legitimate rights of the parties.
In addition, on April 26, 2018, the parties issued the Convention on Self-Discipline of Shanxi Construction Supervision Industry (Trial Implementation) (hereinafter referred to as the Convention on Self-Discipline). Among them, Article 8 stipulates that "the service price shall be reasonably determined according to the charging rules of the industry.." Article 16 stipulates that the supervision units and supervisors who violate this Convention shall be dealt with by the Municipal Supervision Self-Discipline Committee and the Association Self-Discipline Department according to the circumstances. Handling method: (1) Written warning and order for rectification; (2) Internal criticism of the industry (journal, website announcement); (3) Record in the integrity file; (4) If the circumstances are serious, cancel the qualification of the industry's annual evaluation and reduce the integrity level of the enterprise; (5) If the circumstances are serious, cancel the membership of the association; (6) If the circumstances are particularly serious, suggestions shall be made to the competent construction administrative department concerned. "Article 17, paragraph 1, stipulates that" the first violation of Articles 7 to 12 of this Convention shall be dealt with in accordance with Article 16, paragraph 1. If it fails to correct the violation again afterwards, it shall be dealt with in accordance with Article 16 (2) to (5), depending on the facts of the breach and the seriousness of the circumstances. If the circumstances are particularly serious, they shall be dealt with in accordance with Article 16 (6).
The court held that the parties formulated the "Charging Rules" to unify the price level and the range of price changes of engineering supervision services, and organized meetings to adopt and publish them publicly, which violated the provisions of Article 16 of the Anti-monopoly Law before the amendment that "trade associations shall not organize operators of the industry to engage in monopolistic acts prohibited by this chapter". It constitutes an illegal act of "organizing the operators of the industry to reach a monopoly agreement".
According to the third paragraph of Article 46 of the Anti-monopoly Law before the amendment, "If a trade association violates the provisions of this Law and organizes the operators of the industry to reach a monopoly agreement, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency may impose a fine of less than 500000 yuan." If the circumstances are serious, the registration administration organ of social organizations may cancel the registration according to law "and Article 49" When determining the specific amount of fines prescribed in Articles 46, 47 and 48 of this Law, the Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement Agency shall consider the nature, degree and duration of the illegal acts ". It decided to impose a fine of 200000 yuan on the parties concerned.
浙公网安备33010802003254号