Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Perjanjian vertikal merupakan perjanjian antara dua atau lebih pelaku usaha yang beroperasi pada tingkat rantai produksi dan/atau distribusi yang berbeda. Dalam Hukum Persaingan Usaha Indonesia, pasal yang mengatur tentang salah satu jenis perjanjian vertikal adalah Pasal 14 UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 (UULPM) yang mengatur tentang Integrasi Vertikal. Dalam penerapan Pasal 14 UULPM terdapat kekosongan hukum dalam menetapkan sejauh manakah suatu pelaku usaha dapat melanggar Pasal 14 UULPM dari perhitungan pangsa pasarnya. Dalam PT Grab dan PT TPI melawan KPPU (PN Jakarta Selatan, 2020), Majelis Hakim mempertimbangkan batasan pangsa pasar dalam kasus integrasi vertikal yang tidak memiliki dasar hukum yang tepat. Pertimbangan tersebut juga tidak sesuai dengan teori ekonomi dan doktrin rule of reason yang dianut dalam penegakan Pasal 14 UULPM. Pertimbangan demikian dapat berimplikasi pada ketidakpastian hukum di masa yang akan datang sehingga diperlukan regulasi mengenai batasan pangsa pasar yang dapat menjamin kepastian hukum dalam kerangka doktrin rule of reason. Pasal 3 dan Pasal 8 Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER) Uni Eropa dapat menjadi pertimbangan dalam penegakan hukum mengenai integrasi vertikal. Pertama, terdapat safe harbour yang mana para pelaku usaha yang memiliki pangsa pasar di bawah ketentuan dapat dikecualikan dari penegakan hukum sehingga terjamin kepastian hukum. Kedua, untuk pelaku usaha yang melebihi ketentuan batasan pangsa pasar, asesmen terhadap mereka tetap berpaku pada doktrin rule of reason ketimbang berpaku pada praduga ilegalitas karena batasan pangsa pasar dalam VBER hanya digunakan sebagai proksi untuk mengestimasi kekuatan pasar. Penulis menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif untuk menganalisis bagaimana ketentuan batasan pangsa pasar dalam VBER dapat menjadi pertimbangan dalam penegakan Integrasi Vertikal dan bagaimana implikasi ketentuan batasan pangsa pasar yang bersifat safe harbour tersebut dalam penegakan integrasi vertikal. ......Vertical agreement is an agreement between two or more undertakings operating at a different level of production and/or distribution chain. In Indonesian Competition Law, Article 14 of Law No. 5 Year 1999 (UULPM) regulates Vertical Integration as one of many types of vertical agreement. A legal vacuum exists in the enforcement of Article 14 UULPM concerning the extent to which an undertaking can violate Article 14 UULPM, judging from the calculation of its market share. In PT Grab and PT TPI v. KPPU (South Jakarta District Court, 2020), the market share threshold for vertical integration which was opined by the Panel of Judges did not have appropriate legal basis. Furthermore, said threshold is also inconsistent with economic theories and the rule of reason doctrine that was adopted to enforce Article 14 UULPM. Such considerations may have legal uncertainty implications in the future so that there is an urgency to regulate market share threshold provision which can guarantee legal certainty within the framework of the rule of reason doctrine. Article 3 and Article 8 of the EU’s Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER) can be taken into consideration in the enforcement of Vertical Integration. Firstly, the safe harbor nature of the provision ensures legal certainty so that undertakings with market shares below the threshold can be exempted from the law. Secondly, rule of reason is still applicable to assess the undertakings’ agreement whose market share exceeded the threshold, rather than assessing it under the presumption of illegality. This is because the threshold in VBER is only used as a proxy to estimate market power. The author uses juridical-normative method to analyze how can the market share threshold provision in VBER be considered to enforce Vertical Integration and how are the implications of said safe harbor provision in the enforcement of Vertical Integration.

Abstrak :
This article explains the main competition rules in European Community in general. The basic norm of competition rule in European Community (EC) is determined in article 3 (g) EC Treaty. Article 3 (g) provide that "the institution of a system ensuring that competition in the internal market is not distorted". To ensure workable competition in EC were set out in article 81 and 82 EC Treaty the Competition rule. Article 81 (1) prohibits as incompatible with common market, collusion between undertakings that may affect trade member states and has the object or effect of restricting competition within the common market. But not all agreements that perceptibly restrict competition and may effect inter-state trade are prohibited. Some forms of collaboration restrictive of competition may have beneficial effects and are capable exemption by the Commission. By virtue of article 81 (3) the prohibition in article 81 (1) may be declared inapplicable to any agreements or category of agreements provided that they have certain characteristics. This article will elaborate the prohibition of article 81 (1) and the exemption of article 81 (3) and as well the abuse of dominant position of article 82 EC Treaty.