[Kunal Kumar is a 4th year B.A., LL.B.(Hons.) student at NLU Jodhpur)] Introduction In Central Bank of India v. Shri Prakash Chand Jain (1969), the Supreme Court held that a fact which is sought to be proved must be supported by statements made in the presence of the person against whom enquiry is held and the statement made behind the back of the person charged are not to be treated as...
CCI’s Decision on Abuse of Dominant Position by Google
[Pallavi Panigrahi is a graduate of National Law School of India University, Bangalore and is currently working at a Corporate Law Firm in Mumbai. Another post on the topic is available here] The Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) last month imposed a fine of INR 135.86 crores on search engine giant Google (inclusive of Google LLC, Google India Private Limited and Google Ireland Limited) for...
CCI’s Order against Google: What Constitutes the Relevant Market?
[Sanchit Varma is a 4th year BA.LL.B (Hons.) student at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad] Introduction In a recent order, the Competition Commission of India (‘CCI’) imposed a 136 crore fine on Google Inc. for unfair business practices in India. The order was passed pursuant to complaints filed against Google in 2012, wherein it was alleged that the company was abusing its dominant position...
Gun Jumping – The Antitrust Way
[Aditya Sinha is a 5th year B.B.A., L.L.B (Hons.) student at College of Legal Studies, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun] Introduction In the legal antitrust world, the practice of actualizing a transaction before receiving the statutory clearance from the competition authority, or unauthorized co-ordination between the merging parties prior to approval, is referred to as...
Market Dominance: The Inadequacy of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002
[Gokul Plaha is a 4th year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) student at the National Law University, Delhi] Introduction Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 prohibits the abuse of a “dominant position” in the market but does not penalise “dominance” per se. This means that any firm or enterprise is well within its right to acquire a dominating position in the market, even by way of indulging in anti...
Application of the Single Economic Entity Doctrine to Anticompetitive Agreements
[Oorvi Mehta is a III Year student of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) at the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad] Section 3 of the Competition Act 2002 applies to cases of anti-competitive agreements between two or more enterprises. The usual route to examine an infringement of this provision was to determine firstly, whether there was an agreement between two or more enterprises, fulfilling which, secondly...
Systemizing Fairplay – Key Issues in the Indian Competition Law Regime
[Vedika Mittal is a Research Fellow in the Corporate Law and Financial Regulation vertical at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy] Since the enactment of the Competition Act, 2002 (“Competition Act“), the business milieu has changed considerably globally and in India. More and more businesses are now being run in the virtual world and newer models of business exist now which would have been...
The Ambiguous Treatment of Non-Compete Covenants in Joint Venture Agreements
[Anubhuti Maithani is a 2nd year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad, India] A non-compete clause (NCC) is a restrictive covenant, frequently found in combination agreements like mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and joint venture agreements, that prohibits one party from competing with the other on terms stipulated therein. In other words, it restricts one party...
Unexplored Antitrust and Contract Law Issues In Indian Transport Aggregation
[Arjun Agarwal is a 5th year student at WB National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata and Pragya Dahiya a 4th year student at Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat. The authors can be contacted at [email protected]] Much has been written about anti-trust issues surrounding the practices adopted by the likes of Uber and Ola in India. Hardly any attention has, however, been paid to the...
Relevant Turnover and its Basis in the Competition Act
[Guest post by Niranjan Sankar Rao, who is a Fourth Year B.A. LL.B. (Hons) Student at Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat. An earlier post on the topic can be found here.] The Supreme Court of India in May 2017 in Excel Crop Care v. Competition Commission of India, (2017) 8 SCC 47, upheld the Competition Appellate Tribunal’s (COMPAT) decision of awarding penalty based on ‘relevant turnover’. For a...
Recent Comments