|
2026.09
|
Presentation
|
Recent Developments in Japanese Competition Law: Through the Lens of Innovation
|
2026 Korea-Japan Competition Law Academic Research Conference (Korea University)
|
|
2026.08
|
Presentation
|
Rules, Standards and Observability under Japan’s Mobile Software Competition Act
|
Monash Warwick Alliance Digital Regulation Workshop (Monash University)
|
|
2026.08
|
Book
|
Competition Policy in the Platform Era: At the Cutting Edge
|
Yuhikaku (eds. 稲葉僚太, 大泉玄之助, 伊永大輔, 中島菜子; contributed chapters)
|
|
2026.03
|
Commentary
|
Main Developments in Competition Law and Policy 2025 – Japan
|
Kluwer Competition Law Blog
|
|
2026.02
|
Article
|
Goals, Ideology, and the Interpretation of Competition Law
|
Kosei Torihiki no.904 p.45
|
|
2026.01
|
Presentation
|
From Data Hunt to Data Vault: A Closed-Chain Solution for Antitrust Compliance
|
The IAFOR International Conference on Arts & Humanities in Hawaii (IICAH 2026)
|
|
2025.12
|
Presentation
|
An Overview of the Major Developments in Japan’s Competition Law and Policy in 2025
|
2025 Taiwan-Japan Economic Law Conference
|
|
2025.11
|
Presentation
|
Designing Remedies in Dynamic Markets: The District Court Decision of September 2, 2025 in United States v. Google LLC
|
Shojihomu Antimonopoly Law Study Group
|
|
2025.10
|
Article
|
Goals, Ideology, and the Interpretation of Competition Law
|
CPRC Discussion Paper no.CPDP-102-J pp.1–31 (in Japanese)
|
|
2025.10
|
Case note
|
A Case Holding that a Change in the Specifications of a Complementary Product Did Not Constitute an Unfair Trade Practice
|
Hogaku Seminar special issue, Sokuho Hanrei Kaisetsu no.37
|
|
2025.05
|
Presentation
|
Commentary on the MC Data Plus Case
|
Japan Competition Law Forum (Unilateral Conduct Study Group)
|
|
2025.05
|
Commentary
|
A Case Holding that a Change in the Specifications of a Complementary Product Did Not Constitute an Unfair Trade Practice
|
Shin Hanrei Kaisetsu Watch (Economic Law) No.99
|
|
2025.03
|
Commentary
|
Main Developments in Competition Law and Policy 2024 – Japan
|
Kluwer Competition Law Blog
|
|
2025.02
|
Case note
|
Antimonopoly Case Study Group (No. 78): A Case Holding that Restrictions by Fishery Cooperatives on Shipments outside the Cooperative System Constituted an Unfair Trade Practice
|
NBL no.1284
|
|
2025.02
|
Article
|
Strategic Conduct Aimed at Excluding Competitors and Innovation
|
Kosei Torihiki no.892 pp.18–23
|
|
2025.01
|
Commentary
|
[News from Japan] On Hosting the First National Forum for Economic Law Research at Law Faculties
|
Kosei Torihiki no.891 pp.80–81
|
|
2024.12
|
Presentation
|
Content Platforms and the Antimonopoly Act
|
|
|
2024.10
|
Commentary
|
Book Review: Eric A. Posner, How Antitrust Failed Workers
|
Japanese Yearbook of International Economic Law pp.247–251
|
|
2024.09
|
Commentary
|
Competition Law Dictionary
|
|
|
2024.09
|
Presentation
|
A Case Holding that Restrictions by Fishery Cooperatives on Shipments outside the Cooperative System Constituted an Unfair Trade Practice
|
Antimonopoly Cases and Decisions Study Group
|
|
2024.08
|
Case note
|
Excluding Competitors by Restricting Dealings with Rival Firms: The Minami Airport Service Case (Tokyo High Court, January 25, 2023)
|
Keizaiho Hanrei Shinketsu Hyakusen, 3rd ed. (Bessatsu Jurist) vol.60 no.2 pp.28–29
|
|
2024.05
|
Case note
|
A Case Holding that a Change in the Specifications of Printer Ink Cartridges Did Not Constitute an Unfair Trade Practice
|
Jurist special issue, Important Cases of Reiwa 5 (2023) no.1597 pp.230–231
|
|
2024.03
|
Presentation
|
Predatory Innovation and the Antimonopoly Act
|
Japan Competition Law Forum
|
|
2024.03
|
Commentary
|
Distribution agreement
|
Global Dictionary of Competition Law, Concurrences, Art. N° 86010
|
|
2024.01
|
Presentation
|
The Goals of Competition Law, Economic Welfare, and Ideology
|
University of Tokyo KAKENHI research meeting
|
|
2023.12
|
Presentation
|
Interplay of the Japanese Anti-monopoly Act and Blockchain
|
Institute for Future Law, Seikei University
|
|
2023.12
|
Presentation
|
How do we define illegal ‘self-preferencing’ under the Japanese Anti-monopoly Act?
|
ASCOLA Asia 2023 (Kyoto University)
|
|
2023.10
|
Presentation
|
The Goals of Competition Law and Ideology
|
Advanced Competition Law Practice Study Group
|
|
2023.10
|
Article
|
Interplay of the Japanese Anti-monopoly Act and Blockchain
|
NBL no.1252 pp.4–14
|
|
2023.10
|
Presentation
|
Research on the Place of the Concept of Economic Welfare and of Ideology in the Debate on the Goals of Competition Law (Final Report)
|
CPRC Final Report Workshop
|
|
2023.10
|
Case note
|
A Case Holding that Disadvantageous Treatment of Customers because of Their Dealings with a Competitor Constituted Private Monopolization
|
Hogaku Seminar special issue, Sokuho Hanrei Kaisetsu no.33 pp.271–274
|
|
2023.09
|
Article
|
Reconstructing the Concept of Exclusion in Private Monopolization
|
Annual Report of the Japan Association of Economic Law, “Theoretical Issues in Merger Control”
|
|
2023.07
|
Article
|
‘Self-Preferencing’ under the Japanese Anti-monopoly Act
|
Seikei Hogaku no.98 pp.171–202
|
|
2023.06
|
Case note
|
A Case Holding that Disadvantageous Treatment of Customers because of Their Dealings with a Competitor Constituted Private Monopolization
|
Shin Hanrei Kaisetsu Watch (Economic Law) No.88
|
|
2022.12
|
Presentation
|
“New Exclusion” and the Antimonopoly Act
|
Tohoku Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2022.12
|
Presentation
|
Self-Preferencing by Digital Platforms and Competition Law
|
Kansai Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2022.11
|
Presentation
|
The Goals of Competition Law, Economic Welfare, and Ideology
|
CPRC Interim Report Workshop
|
|
2022.10
|
Presentation
|
Reconstructing the Concept of Exclusion in Private Monopolization
|
Japan Association of Economic Law, 2022 Annual Conference
|
|
2022.09
|
Presentation
|
Reconstructing the Concept of Exclusion in Private Monopolization
|
Kansai Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2022.07
|
Presentation
|
Above Cost Predatory Pricing and Private Monopolization
|
ASCOLA 2022 (Universidade Católica Portuguesa)
|
|
2022.06
|
Presentation
|
The Background and Developments of FTC v. Facebook in the United States
|
Shojihomu Antimonopoly Law Study Group
|
|
2022.04
|
Case note
|
U.S. and EU Antitrust Case Studies (No. 140): New Developments in the Regulation of Refusals to Deal in the EU — The Slovak Telekom Judgment of the Court of Justice
|
Kosei Torihiki no.858 pp.70–77
|
|
2022.04
|
Book
|
Reconstructing the Concept of Exclusion in Private Monopolization
|
Shojihomu (ix, 235 pp.)
|
|
2022.04
|
Case note
|
A Case Finding Unlawful Tying against Compatible Products
|
Hogaku Seminar special issue, Sokuho Hanrei Kaisetsu no.30
|
|
2021.12
|
Case note
|
A Case Finding Unlawful Tying against Compatible Products
|
Shin Hanrei Kaisetsu Watch (Economic Law) No.79
|
|
2021.10
|
Case note
|
A New EU Case on Margin Squeeze and Refusal to Deal — The Slovak Telekom Judgment of the Court of Justice
|
International Business Law Executive Summary (IBLES) no.52
|
|
2021.07
|
Case note
|
A Case on the Maintenance and Expansion of Monopoly and Monopsony Power over Fighters by a Mixed Martial Arts Promoter (Le v. Zuffa LLC, 216 F. Supp. 3d 1154)
|
International Business Law Executive Summary (IBLES) no.50
|
|
2021.06
|
Presentation
|
New Developments in the Regulation of Refusals to Deal in the EU — The Slovak Telekom Judgment of the Court of Justice
|
Shojihomu Antimonopoly Law Study Group
|
|
2021.04
|
Presentation
|
The Basis and Challenges of Regulating Unilateral, Direct Refusals to Deal
|
Tokyo Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2021.02
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
The Regulatory Basis for Unilateral Refusals to Deal in Japan
|
Osaka Law Review vol.70 no.5 pp.1017–1082
|
|
2021.01
|
Presentation
|
Research on the Place of the Concept of Economic Welfare and of Ideology in the Debate on the Goals of Competition Law
|
Competition Policy Research Center (CPRC), Japan Fair Trade Commission
|
|
2021.01
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
Regulating Predatory Pricing as a Form of Private Monopolization in Japan (4)
|
Hogaku Ronso vol.187 no.3 pp.77–105
|
|
2020.12
|
Presentation
|
The Regulation of Exclusionary Private Monopolization and Economic Welfare
|
Contract and Equality Study Group
|
|
2020.11
|
Presentation
|
The Basis and Challenges of Regulating Unilateral, Direct Refusals to Deal
|
Kansai Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2020.09
|
Presentation
|
A Case on the Maintenance and Expansion of Monopoly and Monopsony Power over Fighters by a Mixed Martial Arts Promoter (Le v. Zuffa LLC, 216 F. Supp. 3d 1154)
|
Shojihomu Antimonopoly Law Study Group
|
|
2020.08
|
Case note
|
Spirit Airlines Case: An Analysis of the Judgment of the Sixth Circuit
|
Kosei Torihiki no.838 pp.91–98
|
|
2020.07
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
Regulating Predatory Pricing as a Form of Private Monopolization in Japan (3)
|
Hogaku Ronso vol.187 no.1 pp.104–119
|
|
2020.07
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
Regulating Predatory Pricing as a Form of Private Monopolization in Japan (1) (2)
|
Hogaku Ronso vol.186 no.3 pp.78–101 and vol.186 no.4
|
|
2020.02
|
Presentation
|
The Role of Competition Law and Policy in Human Resources (Competition in Services Provided by Individuals)
|
8th meeting, International Economic Law and Policy Research Network
|
|
2020.02
|
Presentation
|
A Case Accepting the Reasonableness of Expert Testimony Showing a Possibility of Recoupment through Prices above Average Variable Cost and Remanding the District Court Judgment — Spirit Airlines, Sixth Circuit
|
Shojihomu Antimonopoly Law Study Group
|
|
2019.12
|
Presentation
|
Revisiting the Regulation of Predatory Pricing
|
Kansai Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2019.11
|
Presentation
|
Regulating Predatory Pricing as a Form of Private Monopolization in Japan
|
Tokyo Economic Law Study Group
|
|
2019.03
|
Doctoral dissertation
|
Reconstructing the Concept of Exclusion in Private Monopolization: Focusing on the Actor’s Intent
|
Doctoral dissertation, Graduate School of Law, Kyoto University
|
|
2017.10
|
Case note
|
Regulation of Selective Price Cuts under EU Competition Law: Post Danmark I
|
Kosei Torihiki no.802 pp.80–85
|
|
2017.04
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
The Role of Intent for Identifying Exclusionary Conduct: A Comparative Analysis between the Japanese Antimonopoly Act and the U.S. Antitrust Law (2, final)
|
Aoyama Law Forum (ALF) vol.5 no.2 pp.235–268
|
|
2016.12
|
Presentation
|
A Case on Whether Selective Price Cuts Constitute an Exclusionary Abuse
|
Antimonopoly Law Study Group, Kyoto Comparative Law Center
|
|
2016.07
|
Peer-reviewed article
|
The Role of Intent for Identifying Exclusionary Conduct: A Comparative Analysis between the Japanese Antimonopoly Act and the U.S. Antitrust Law (1)
|
Aoyama Law Forum (ALF) vol.5 no.1 pp.79–112
|