Decisions of Administrative or Quasi-judical Agencies - 2002

1. Peng Yao International Co., Ltd. was accused of making the deceptive claim “the standard terms of these provisions were taken from the model contract provided by the Fair Trade Commission” in its sales contracts, in violation of the Fair Trade Law 01/09/04
2. Taiwan Provincial English Studies Society was complained for violation of the Fair Trade Law by citing a letter issued by the Ministry of Education in the promotional information for the activity “National Junior High and Elementary School English Proficiency Ranking Test” and listing the Ministry as the directing office 01/09/04
3. Tso Tan Nu Glasses Co. Ltd. was complained for violating the Fair Trade Act through the use of another’s well-known trademark as the special portion of its corporate name when applying for establishment and registration
4. Namchow Chemical Industrial Co., Ltd. and Chow Chu Distribution Co., Ltd. were complained for marketing the 'Rice Cracks' crackers in violation of Fair Trade Act
5. Gravel volume allocation by the Hualian County Gravel Industry Trade Association, as well as boycotting sales of dredged materials by non-members and refusal of membership applications from non-members, affecting the trading order as regards supply and demand on the gravel market in the Hualian area in violation of the Fair Trade Law
6. Kuo-Yang Tire Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law through publishing advertisement for Q8 petroleum products quoting prices well below the market value
7. Complaint against Taiwan United Petroleum Co., Ltd. for obviously unfair practices in violation of the law sufficient to affect trading order, such as the use of exorbitant penalties for breach of contract in agreements with privately-run filling stations and failure to provide them with the right to terminate their contracts, as well as the use of improper methods such as the imposition of substantial performance bonds to restrict the right of other parties to terminate contracts during the period of performance
8. Tai Ta Gas Station Co., Ltd. was complained for improperly hoarding rice wine, an obviously unfair practice sufficient to affect trading order, in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
9. Allegations of falsely recruiting home contractors and profiting from collection of materials fees by Liao Tien-yao of the Ya Tai Crafts Shop in violation of the Fair Trade Law
10. Ex-officio investigation by the Fair Trade Commission into Kaohsiung City Medical Association's restriction that members of primary care clinic must not see patients every other Sunday, in violation of the Fair Trade Law
11. ETWebs Taiwan Inc. was complained for publishing false advertising in its “3C Convenience Card” promotion in violation of the Fair Trade Law
12. International Bank of Taipei was complained for violating the Fair Trade Law in collecting blank check processing fees
13. Hi-Life International Co., Ltd. was complained for using false advertising and deceptive or obviously unfair methods to recruit and exclude its franchisees in violation of the Fair Trade Law
14. Use of non-transparent terms relating to de-stocking of goods at Circle K Convenience Store Taiwan Limited convenience stores, an obviously unfair trading practice sufficient to affect the trading order in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
15. Mr. Chang Chin-bing violated the Fair Trade Law by engaging in illegal multi-level sales
16. Mr. Chen Hsin-he violated the Fair Trade Law by engaging in illegal multi-level sales
17. Chin Chi International Enterprise Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law through engaging in an illegal multi-level sales scheme
18. Hsin Li Filling Station Enterprise Co., Ltd. was complained for using “Hsin Li [Sony]” as part of its company name in violation of Article 20(1)(ii) and Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
19. Yuan Ji Financial Management and Planning Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law through engaging in a prohibited form of multi-level sales
20. Lin Yu Cultural Enterprise Co., Ltd, Perfect World Technology Co., Ltd., and Ch'ao Ha Webservice Co., Ltd., along with 14 other individuals violated the Fair Trade Law for engaging in unlawful multi-level sales
21. Use of a multi-level sales platform by Hong Chi International to sell membership cards and illegal handling of the withdrawal of participants and the distribution of refunds
22. Softworld Media Co. was complained in violation of Articles 20 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law
23. Liao Wen-chih, Kung Hsiang Jen Sheng Telecommunications Network Co., Ltd., and Over The Centery [sic] Technology Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade law through engaging in multi-level sales in which members received bonuses primarily through introduction of new members
24. Ho I Lock Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law in using false and misleading representations for the sales of it's A-locks and through engaging in obviously unfair acts capable of affecting the trading order
25. Pacific Sogo Department Stores Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law for using false and misleading representations on posters during anniversary celebration
26. Profit Net International Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law for engaging in prohibited form of multi-level sales
27. He Pao Management Consultants Ltd. sold gasoline coupons and other products through a multi-level sales platform where the main source of income for participants came from the introduction of new members, constituting a prohibited form of multi-level sales
28. Violation of the Fair Trade Law by Chang Shu-feng in establishing the multi-level sales organization Kuei Tsu Ch'i Chien Corporation, in which the participants received bonuses mainly from introducing other participants
29. Lu T'ien-pao et al. (seven respondents in total) of Ripo International Bio-technology Co., Ltd. were complained for stealing another company's trade secrets in violation of the Fair Trade Law
30. Four asphalt excavation enterprises in the Kaohsiung-Pingtung area allegedly violated the Fair Trade Law by collusively stipulating project prices through a networking association
31. Gnan-jang Plastics Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by recklessly issuing warning letters to its trading counterparts
32. The dissemination of false information, by Mr. Huang Te-en, that the Liberty Times restricted its advertising agencies from accepting advertisements by advertisers who had previously placed advertisement in its competitors' newspapers, is a deceptive behavior that is sufficient to affect trading order, and is thus a violation of the Fair Trade Law
33. Chien Hsing Cultural Enterprises Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by disseminating false information on the www.cashbox.com.tw website indicating that Cashbox Enterprises Ltd. had “exclusive rights” on songs for musical accompaniment
34. The ROC Over-the-Counter Securities Exchange abused its market monopoly, in violation of Fair Trade Law, by improperly collecting user fees for providing OTC securities trading information
35. Taiwan Stock Exchange Corporation abused its market monopoly, in violation of Fair Trade Law, by improperly collecting user fees for providing trading information on listed securities(The decision has been revoked)
36. Far Eastern Air Transport Corp., TransAsia Airway Corp., and Uni Airways Corp. accused of violating the Fair Trade Law by offering lower prices for domestic route tickets to Cheng Hsin Travel Service
37. Allegation that President Chain Store Corporation employed coercion, inducement with profit, or other improper means in its franchise recruiting practices to win over trading counterparts of competitors in violation of the Article 19(iii) of the Fair Trade Law
38. Contour Optik Inc. allegedly violated the Fair Trade Law by sending warning letters and publishing magazine advertisements under the pretext of patent infringement
39. Taipei North District Gas Ind. allegedly violated the Fair Trade Law by improperly selling gas safety equipment under the pretext of gas safety inspection services
40. San Yang Energy Development Co., Ltd. allegedly violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by making false representations in its advertising catalog
41. Sin Li Din Bio-Tech Enterprise Co., Ltd. allegedly violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by making false and misleading representations in its advertisements
42. Tel-Ox World First Trading Co., Ltd. alleged Hung Tu Enterprises Ltd. violated Articles 20 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law
43. Hsong-Feng Int., Corp. alleged to have engaged in exaggerated and untruthful advertising in selling its “Feng Li Ting Microcomputer Breast Massager,” in violation of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law
44. Complaint alleging Chin Chih Spirits, Ltd.'s advertisement of “Chin Chih Kan Chun Rice Wine” contained false representations in violation of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law
45. The Chunghua Fire Prevention and Safety Association's conduct of its multi-level sales operations allegedly violated the provisions of Article 23 of the Fair Trade Law
46. Taiwan Tagta Enterprise Corp. was complained in violation of Article 20(1)(i) and Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
47. Speed United Corporation and Jun Long Industrial Co. Ltd. allegedly violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by making false and misleading representations of place of manufacture on product packaging
48. The Kaohsiung City Association of Funeral Directors and the Kaohsiung County Association of Funeral Directors violated the Fair Trade Law by prohibiting member funeral directors from contracting with non-member providers to provide foods and decorate mourning halls
49. Three Real Estate Brokers, Sinyi Realty Co., Pacific Rehouse Co., and Chinatrust Real Estate Co., alleged to have violated the Fair Trade Law by implementing a multiple listing service in the Hsinchu area
50. TelePaq Technology Inc. violated the Fair Trade Law with its advertisement of "NT$1 Million in Cash Promotion Program"
51. Chunghwa Telecom Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law with its "Buy Two Minutes and Get Five Minutes Free" advertisement
52. Chyuan Lien Enterprise Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by abusing its relatively dominant position to inappropriately collect a "business premises rent" surcharge from suppliers
53. Pacific Sogo Department Stores Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by imposing improper restrictions on the business activities of a trading counterpart as a condition of trading
54. Lung Ying International Technology, Ltd. allegedly engaged in unlawful multi-level marketing in violation of the Fair Trade Law
55. Consmat Enterprise Co., Ltd. was accused of plagiarizing the well-known trade dress of another enterprise on its "Chien Chuan Special Grade Erguotou" liquor in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
56. The external appearance Galien Industrial Co., Ltd.'s "White Men Toothpaste" allegedly violated the provisions of Articles 22 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law. The Supreme Administrative Court subsequently reversed the original disposition and the original judgment and ordered that a new disposition be made based on a more appropriate legal basis
57. Watson's Park 'N Shop Ltd. violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law through false advertising
58. Bottled gas distributors in Taitung County allegedly engaged in concerted action to raise prices in violation of the Fair Trade Law
59. Brilliant Tiger Ind. Co., Ltd. improperly issued patent infringement warning letters to trading counterparts of a competitor in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
60. Pinenet Co., Ltd. improperly limited its trading counterpart's business activities by imposing tie-in sales as a condition of business engagement in violation of the Fair Trade Law
61. Tai Ta Gas Station (Formosa Gas Station's Huatan City location) promoted sales of petroleum products at low prices by means of cash discounts in violation of the Fair Trade Law
62. Formosa Petrochemical Corporation allegedly violated the Fair Trade Law by improperly vying for the business of trading counterparts of its competitors by means of inducements such as offers to pay their performance bonds
63. Securities & Futures Institute of the Republic of China allegedly restricted the resale price of its books in violation of the Fair Trade Law
64. The Fair Trade Commission initiated its own investigation into price discrimination by Chinese Petroleum Corporation (Chinese Petroleum) against six dealers in southern Taiwan, in violation of the Fair Trade Law
65. Rung Sheng Enterprise Co., Ltd. was complained for improperly mailing patent infringement warning letters in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
66. Sale of gasoline coupons and other products by He Pao Management Consultants Ltd. through a multi-level sales platform where the main source of income for participants came from introduction of new members, rather than from marketing or sales of goods or services at reasonable market prices, thus constituting a violation of the Fair Trade Act
67. Far Eastern Air Transport Corporation and Uni Airways Corporation applied for approval of concerted action involving ticket sharing on the Taipei-Taitung route 01/09/04
68. Far Eastern Air Transport Corporation, Uni Airways Corporation and TransAsia Airways Corporation applied for approval to engage in concerted action involving the use of tickets that are transferable without endorsement on the three airlines' Taipei-Tainan routes 01/09/04
69. Eastern Multimedia Co., Ltd. filed for approval to merge with Northern Taoyuan Cable Television Co., Ltd.
70. Application of the merger of LITE-ON Technology Corporation, LITE-ON Electronics, Inc., SILITEK Corporation and GVC Corporation filed with the Commission
71. Hewlett-Packard Company and Compaq Computer Corporation filed a report of merger with the Fair Trade Commission
72. Chinese Petroleum Corporation, having administered stock holdings in private companies on behalf of the national treasury before the Fair Trade Law went into force, asked the Fair Trade Commission for an advisory opinion as to whether the company was required to submit an Application for merger in connection with its acquisition of said stock holdings after the Fair Trade Law went into force 10/01/02

[Browse by APEC Member Economies][Browse by Subject Categories] [Home]
[2011] [2010] [2009] [2008] [2007] [2006] [2005] [2004] [2003] [2001] [2000] [1999] [1998] [1997][1996] [1995][1994] [1993][1992]