Decisions of Administrative or Quasi-judical Agencies - Other Deceptive or Obviously Unfair Conducts-2005

1. Sesame Village Education Co., Ltd. was accused of concealing or delaying to disclose important trading information when recruiting franchisees, in violation of the Fair Trade Law ^2006/08/11
2. FTC initiated an investigation, ex officio, regarding the possible monopoly of the Language Training & Testing Center in handling General English Proficiency Test ^2006/08/11
3. Nikomart Co., Ltd. did not disclose important trading information prior to signing franchise agreement, in violation of the Fair Trade Law ^2006/08/11
4. Yonchang Enterprise Corp. was accused of plagiarizing the Chinese descriptions of product features from other business’ Web site, in possible violation of the Fair Trade Law ^2006/08/11
5. A complaint is filed against Hsien Ching Stainless Steel Industrial Co., Ltd. for violation of the Fair Trade Law by improperly sending letters accusing of infringement of its patent ^2006/03/31
6. A complaint is filed against Hsu Hui Ting Beauty Salon for not giving the trading counterparts opportunities to peruse the contract prior to signing , violat ing Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law^2006/03/31
7. A complaint is filed against First International Telecom Co. for not disclosing the important trading information of its “Chi Nien Hao Chi 0 Plan” , violat ing the Fair Trade Law ^2006/03/31
8. Four Pillars Enterprise Co. filed a complaint against Avery Dennison for using a joint venture as bait to steal its trade secrets, Avery Dennison counter-charged Four Pillars Enterprise for making and disseminating false statements that are sufficient to damage its business reputation^2006/03/23
9. FA complaint is filed against Nichia Corporation for improperly disseminating false statement that the other enterprise has infringed its patent ^2006/03/23
10. A complaint was filed against Tsai Chen-Chin of KLC Company for copying the product and service representation of Yum! Restaurants (Taiwan) Co., Ltd., has deceptive or obviously unfair conduct that is able to affect trading order and violated Article 20 and Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law^2006/03/23
11. A complaint was filed against SDC Co., Ltd. for copying the product and service representation of Yum! Restaurants (Taiwan) Co., Ltd., has deceptive or obviously unfair conduct that is able to affect trading order and violated Article 20 and Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law^2006/03/23
12. The advertisement “Hsin Ti Lai Heng No. 61 Pao Tsuan Hsin Ti” building of Chu Ta Construction Ltd. Inc., is false and sufficient to adversely affect trading order, in violation of Fair Trade Law^2005/10/22
13. A complaint is filed against Game Flier International Corp. for ignoring the customers’ rights and interests in the “user agreement” posted at game platform^2005/10/22
14. A complaint is filed against Hsing Ya Tai Company for improperly disseminating a criminal complaint, in violation of the Fair Trade Law ^2005/10/22
15. RT-Mart International Ltd. abuses its relative superior position to improperly charge its suppliers additional fees, an obviously unfair conduct that is sufficient to adversely affect trading order, in violation of the Fair Trade Laws^2005/10/22
16. A complaint is filed against British Isle of Man Company L.G.M. Limited, Taiwan Branch for allegedly violating the Fair Trade Law in its marketing scheme^2005/10/22
17. A complaint is filed against US company AKT Inc., and US company Applied Material Co., for indiscriminately issuing warning letters, a suspicious violation of the Fair Trade Law2005/04/14
18. Investigation on whether the relevant business operators were in violation of the Fair Trade Law concerning the imbalance of supply and demand for domestic granulated sugar in early 20042005/03/24
    
19. Hung Yuan Rice Company and several other enterprises affected the market function of supply and demand for domestic glutinous rice by conferring on the tender amount and tender quantity and by lending food dealer permits in violation of Article 14(1) and Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law2005/03/09
    
20. Trade-Van Information Services Co. and Universal EC Inc. respectively filed a complaint to accuse each other of violating the Fair Trade Law2005/02/24
    
21. Chu Ta Construction Co., Ltd. was suspected of violating the Fair Trade Law for selling their pre-sold units, “Hsin Ti Lai Heng No. 69 Chi Tsuan Hsin Ti”2005/02/24
    
22. Yuan Fu Development Co., Ltd. was suspected of violating the Fair Trade Law for making false and misleading representation regarding the mezzanine design when selling its pre-sold units and for requiring customers to pay deposits prior to the provision of contracts2005/02/24
    
23. Idee Department Store of China Rebar Co., Ltd., Taipei and Taoyuan branches are complained of plagiarizing the appearance of other’s products and giving these products as giveaways in the promotional activities of the aforementioned branches, a suspected violation of the Article 20 and Article 24 of Fair Trade Law2005/02/03
    
24. A comprehensive study on the promotional activities of the domestic gasoline stations in order to find out whether the incomplete disclosure of price information is a violation of the Fair Trade Law2005/01/20
25. The Ministry of Education inquires in writing whether holding an education material seminar for schoolteachers selecting Official Textbooks violates the Fair Trade Law^2006/08/11

[Browse by APEC Member Economies] [Browse by Subject Categories]
[2007] [2006] [2004] [2003] [2002] [2001] [2000] [1999] [1998] [1997] [1996] [1995] [1994] [1993][1992]