Kaohsiung Architects' Association was sanctioned in violation of the Fiar Trade Law for circulating a letter among its members enclosing a list of engineers who were blacklisted in notices and for advising members to scrutinize engineers
Chinese Taipei
Case:
Kaohsiung Architects' Association was sanctioned in violation of the Fiar Trade Law for circulating a letter among its members enclosing a list of engineers who were blacklisted in notices and for advising members to scrutinize engineers
Key Words:
industry association, boycott [refusal to deal], likelihood of obstructing fair competition
Reference:
Fair Trade Commission Decision of the 234th Commission Meeting; Disposition of (85) Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 065
Industry:
Professionals [refers to persons in professions or who work on their own such as lawyers, architects, writers, and so on] (8252)
Relevant Laws:
Article 19(i) of the Fair Trade Law
Summary:
1. The Kaohsiung Architects Association [the "KAA"] held a general meeting of its members on 25 March 1993. At the meeting an extemporaneous motion was made: Certain members of the Association of Structural Engineers have caused serious harm to the KAA members by their radical way ... in pursuit of exorbitant profit from concerted actions...at each meeting, these persons exhibit a bad attitude without communicating rationally... Such behavior cannot provide the structural design required by architects. In order to prevent the KAA members from unknowingly engaging such persons and thereby suffering losses, relevant information should be collected. Resolved: the KAA board of directors should take action. In May, 1993, the KAA board of directors passed the following resolution pursuant to the aforementioned resolution of the KAA general meeting: The disciplinary committee shall collect information on the names of structural engineers whose activities have harmed the interests of the KAA members and forward these names to KAA members; in addition, the disciplinary committee shall look into the design projects involved and study the possible actions to be taken. On 29 May, 1993 the KAA circulated a letter among its members as follows: Attached is a list of structural engineers (a Mr. Hung and six others) who are not friendly to the KAA members. Members should scrutinize structural engineers to avoid loss. Another letter was circulated among its members on 7 July, 1993: Should any member uses the services the listed persons for structural engineering works from now on, please advise this association of the details of fees and circumstances of the work so that this association may provide the same to other members for reference.
2. Disputes between the KAA and some structural engineers should be handled through legal channels. However, pursuant to the resolutions of the general members meeting and the board meeting, the KAA came up with a "blacklist" of structural engineers and advised KAA members to "scrutinize" persons for engineering projects. The objective, viewed under ordinary circumstances, was to cause KAA members to refuse to deal with the seven engineers. Because the structural engineers differed in opinions with the KAA, the KAA made a conclusion that the engineers were uncooperative, and decided to collect a list for study of actions to be taken. The KAA further circulated the list to identify "unfriendly" engineers. According to the KAA representatives who testified before this Commission, the purpose of the actions was: To avoid having KAA members inadvertently suffer damage due to working with these engineers, the disciplinary committee was asked to compile information and to notify members to be careful in dealing with these seven engineers. With regards to the 7 July letter in which the KAA asked members to report on transactions with these seven engineers it was intended to "understand the members' dealings with the seven engineers, so to assess the effect of the 29 May letter." This was clearly a follow up action to the letter. Although the KAA argued that they merely suggested that their members scrutinize engineers, it is evident that this was intended to be a concerted action and constituted a boycott meeting the requirement of "causing another enterprise to discontinue supply, purchase or other business transactions with a particular enterprise with the intent to cause harm to such particular enterprise." Furthermore, the Architects Law states: "...with regard to the specialized engineering required for the structure and facilities of a building, the commissioned architect shall ask to a duly registered specialized engineer in charge...". If an architects' association limits the freedom of its members regarding their choice of specified engineers, the competition of the market for structural engineers will be reduced.
3. Accordingly, the KAA is ordered to immediately cease the boycott activities and shall, within three months rescind the aforementioned resolutions of the general meeting and the board. These matters shall be notified to the KAA members.
Summarized by Yeh, Ning
Supervised by Chen, Ming-huang
＊: For information of translation, click here
[Browse by APEC Member
Economies] [Browse by Subject Categories] [Home]
[Decisions] [Approvals] [Interpretations] [Administrative Guidance]