反托拉斯法域外效力之國際法研究：以美國新近發展為中心

Abstract

一般而言，法律之規範效力以「屬地主義」為原則，然而隨著跨國貿易日益頻繁，越來越多反托拉斯法案件涉及域外管轄權行使此等超國界法範疇之討論：究竟一國在適用反托拉斯法時，能否對於非純粹內國案件行使其管轄權？若答案為肯定，則合理行使域外管轄範圍之界限為何？ 本文因此欲從國際法觀點探討反托拉斯法域外效力行使之合理性，並主要以美國反托拉斯法為研究領域。美國反托拉斯法對於域外效力問題之討論開端甚早，歷來美國聯邦法院對於主要反托拉斯法規薛曼法（Sherman Act）域外效力之態度，約略可區分為屬地主義、效果理論、個案利益衡量、FTAIA之制定，以及融入國際禮讓觀點等階段，其一度因為過度擴張薛曼法域外管轄範圍，而引起不少爭議與衝突。 本文首先將簡要概述國際法上管轄權類型，接著分析國際法上各國行使管轄權時應遵守之原則與界線，並回顧美國案例法之各階段演變，探討其域外效力管轄權實務發展經驗。第五章則會特別分析2014年聯邦第七巡迴上訴法院於Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics案所作之判決，作為佐證本文結論的其中一個例子。該案是近年來少見大幅縮減美國反托拉斯法域外效力管轄之案件，Posner法官主筆的判決理由書明顯展現出國際禮讓之精神與落實。最後，本文透過判決分析以及質性訪談之實證研究，檢視美國近年來反托拉斯法域外管轄行使之合理性，並分析聯邦法院對於相關法條要件判定標準，希冀給予台灣企業或執法機關作為參考，同時對於美國反托拉斯法域外管轄之合理行使範圍提出想法與建議。

The territorial principle is the most basic principle of jurisdiction in international law. Under this principle, jurisdiction applies to the acts that have been committed within the territory. However, as global trade thrives, more and more antitrust cases involve in the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction. It is debated that whether a State can apply its domestic law to foreign antitrust violations? If the answer is affirmative, then there comes to the second question: how to exercise the extraterritorial jurisdiction reasonably? This article aims to discuss the extraterritorial application of U.S. antitrust law from international law perspective. The international reach of the Sherman Act can be roughly divided into the following stages: strict territorial jurisdiction, effects doctrine, interest-balancing approach, the enactment of FTAIA, and the consideration of international comity. The U.S. court once over expanded the scope of the Sherman Act and thus gave rise to international tension. This article will first briefly introduce the types of jurisdiction under international law, and then discuss the principles for reasonable exercising of jurisdiction under international law. Later on, it will analyze the development of the extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act. In chapter five, this article will specifically analyze the Seventh Circuit’s ruling in Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics as a supportive example. Finally, through the empirical study, this article hopes to provide references to Taiwanese enterprises or governmental institutions about the Federal Courts’ analysis on the criteria under the Sherman Act’s jurisdiction, as well as to propose a preferred approach to limit the extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act.