1-3 (Exchange of information concerning combination of partners in a joint venture)

Conduct of exchanging information concerning combinations of partners in joint ventures between a firm intending to participate in a bid as a partner in a joint venture and a firm intending to participate in a bid individually or as a partner in other joint venture, or , of promoting such kind of exchange of information by a trade association (Excluding such conduct which comes under 4-9).

## (Point of issue)

Such exchange of information is often transformed into the exchange of information for the predetermined of an expected bid winner. In such a case, it would raise problems under the Antimonopoly Act, regarded as leading to the predetermined of an expected bid winner.

Moreover, a trade association's conduct of giving to its members instructions of, or predetermined among its members combination of partners in a joint venture might raise problems under the Antimonopoly Act, regarded as accompanying the predetermined of an expected bid winner. In certain cases, such conduct inherently and of itself constitutes violation, regarded as unjustly restricting the functions or activities of members (Section 8(iv)).

## (Specific cases of violation)

Firm X and other construction firms (FTC Recommendation decision No.20 of 1993)

In this case, involving bids competed by designated firms or comparison of estimates submitted by designated firms for laying sewer pipes ordered by City A, the designated firms, being divided into Group-1 and Group-2 by City A as candidates of partners of joint ventures, had held meetings named as "combination meetings," and each group had selected the firm to compose the joint venture which would be the bid winner and they had predetermined the joint venture composed by the selected firms as the expected winner. This was found to be in violation of Section 3.

## 1 -4 (Levying of special membership-fees or charges)

A trade association's conduct of levying special membership-fees or charges on its member, according to each contract awarded through a bid.

## (Point of issue)

Such conduct is often undertaken to facilitate the predetermined of an expected bid winner. In such a case, it would raise problems under the Antimonopoly Act, regarded as accompanying the predetermined of an expected bid winner.

## (Specific cases of violation)

Trade Association X of surveyors (FTC Recommendation decision No.5 of 1993)

In this case, involving bids competed by designated firms for aerial-photographic surveying work ordered by Ministry A, the trade association had decided that it would make its members predetermine the expected bid winner, and would make the bid winner pay special membership-fees to the association after being awarded the contract. This was found to be in violation of Section 8(1)(i) (Sec.8(i) of the existing Antimonopoly Act).

## • Conduct in principle not constituting violation

1-5 (Expression of interest in participation in a bid to the contract awarding public agency)

A firm's conduct of expressing, to the contract awarding public agency, interest to participate in a forthcoming bid and such pertinent technical information as its past