S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
-
Upload
komaljjwala -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
1/53
1
BUSINESS LAWS
SYMBIOSIS INSTITUTE
OF BUSINESSMANAGEMENT
PUNE
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
2/53
2
BUSINESS LAWS
Prof. Bala
------------------------------------------------------------------
Session 4
Competition Act 2002
Presentation on 2.12.2009
11.45 to 13.00 Hr.
Marketing A X-201
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
3/53
3
Rapport buildingRapport buildingHelping factors Hindering factorsSmile
Conversation
Listening Straight to Point
- Feelings Distractions
- Concerns Absence of nonVerbal
- Problems
Posture
Eye Contact
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
4/53
4
BUSINESS LAWSAgenda
1 Recap
board related matters, accounts, audit etc.Classification of offences, Prevention &Adjudication of offences InvestigationCompounding of offences and consent
orders2 Todays TopicCompetition Act 2002 and amendments of2007
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
5/53
5
What is com
petitionWhat is com
petitionWhat is competition?
- an economic rivalry amongst economic
enterprises
- Global scenario competition has become greatpractical importance
- Ultimately consumer interest needs to beprotected
Is the concept of competition
is new for us?
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
6/53
6
Quote fromQuote from
ArthashastraArthashastrawritten 321written 321--296 Bc296 BcDisplayed the lack of trust in traders.
There was of tendency to form cartelsin order to fix prices, following wereprescribed:-
- heavy fines- to discourage such offences
- with a view to protect consumers.
.Chanakya in his Arthashastra
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
7/53
7
COMPETITION POLICYCOMPETITION POLICYCompetition Policy
- preservation and promotion of the competitive
process- Encourages efficiency in production of goods
and services
- Effects on innovation and adjustment of
technological change- Sustained economic growth
- Rivals have equal opportunities to compete
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
8/53
8
COMPETITIONCOMPETITION FAIRFAIRCompetition policy & competition law
-Competition policy can be genus
-Competition law provides necessary teeth
for enforcement the policy
-Competition fair and unfair
-Fair two enterprises adopt fairmeans ofproduction of fair goods / services, investment
in research and development etc
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
9/53
9
COMPETITIONCOMPETITION UNFAIRUNFAIRUnfair
- Enterprise adopts Restrictive Trade
Practices (RTP)
- Predatory pricing
- Exclusive dealing
- Resale-pricemaintenance- Cartel (RTP have an appreciable
adverse effect on competition)
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
10/53
10
Competition lawCompetition law
Global HistoryGlobal History RomanRepublicAround 50BC we can trace an
early example of competition law is the Lex Julia deAnnona, enacted during the - AdamSmith s -
Wealth of Nations France:
- Chaplier Law of 1791 which contained aprovision that barred members of the same
trade from
assem
bling for the purpose ofpromoting their common interest.
Canada:
- introduced Competition Law in 1889 Act forthe Prevention and suppression of
Combinations in Restraint of Trade.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
11/53
11
Competition lawCompetition law
Global HistoryGlobal History Unites State of America:
- introduced Sherman Act in 1890, Clayton
Act in 1914, Robinson Patm
an Act in 1936,Hart Scott- Rodino Anti-Trust Improvement Act in1976.
Collusive behaviour ofmerchants engaged intrading/distribution of farm goods played important
role in the decision to enact these laws. (Merchantsacted as buyers Cartel).
Collusive alliances were named as trusts and thusthe term anti-trust was coined.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
12/53
12
Competition lawCompetition law
Global HistoryGlobal History Victims of collusive behaviour were
farmers and small agrarian business
firm
s.S
ince they were large in num
ber,laws were framed to protect them.
Till 1991 40 countries had introducedCompetition Laws in one form or other.
After 1991 more than 110 countrieshave Competition Laws.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
13/53
13
REGULATORY ACTS ONREGULATORY ACTS ON
COMPETITIONCOMPETITION -- INDIAINDIA
1 Restrictive Trade practices (RTPs) Act
19562 Monopolistic Trade Practices (MTPs)
Act 1969
3 Unfair Trade Practices (UTPs)4 Division of undertakings, in certain
cases
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
14/53
14
RESTRICTED TRADERESTRICTED TRADE
PRACTICESPRACTICESDeemedRTPs
1 Refusal to deal
2 Tie in sales (A tie-in sale results from a contractual arrangement
between a consumer and a producer whereby the consumer can obtainthe desired good (tying good) only if he agrees also to purchase adifferent good (tied good) from the producer.)
3 Exclusive dealings
4 Collective price fixation
5 Discrimination in granting benefits
6 Resale pricem
aintenance (Resale price maintenance is thepractice whereby a manufacturer and its distributors agree that thelatter will sell the former's product at certain prices (resale pricemaintenance), at or above aprice floor(minimum resale pricemaintenance) or at or below a price ceiling (maximum resale pricemaintenance). If a reseller refuses to maintain prices, either openly orcovertly (see grey market), the manufacturer will stop doing business
with it.)7 Restricted output /supply / allocation
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
15/53
15
RESTRICTED TRADERESTRICTED TRADE
PRACTICESPRACTICES8 Restriction on manufacturing process
9 Exclusion / boycott agreement
10 Predatory pricing
11 Restriction in buying
12 Collusive bidding
13 Agreements prohibited by Govt.14 Any agreement enforcing any of the
above
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
16/53
16
UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES
UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES
UTP
- Misleading advertisement
- Bargain sales
- Gift schemes and promotional contests
- Violation of prescribed standards- Hoarding and destruction of goods
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
17/53
17
MONOPOLY TRADEMONOPOLY TRADE
PRACTICESPRACTICES
MTPs
- High price control of supply
- Unreasonably preventing competition
- Limiting technical development
MRTP comm
ission could investigate undersection 31 of the Act as per procedure in
regulation 29
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
18/53
18
Competition lawCompetition law IndiaIndia
1970 - MRTP ACT 1969 came into effect was thefirst enactment in India to deal with competition issues.
1991 - a Committee was formed to examine the
existing MRTP Act with shift in focus from curbingmonopolies to promoting competition after thecommencement of New Economic Policy in 1991
Upon Committees recommendations and afterdetailed deliberations, Competition Act, 2002 wasenacted.
Notified in January, 2003,
enforcement delayed due to certain legal issues raisedin courts.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
19/53
19
Com
petition lawCom
petition law IndiaIndia 2007 - Competition (Amendment ) Act, 2007
was enacted (Sep.07)
Based on international norm
s, the act hasbeen called close to state-of-the-art (OECD,
Economic Survey of India Report 2007).
It is broadly comparable to those of other
jurisdictions with effective laws in this area
and, for the most part, embodies a modern
economics-based approach (WTO Trade
Policy Review of India, 2007).
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
20/53
20
Competition Act Vs MRTP ActCompetition Act Vs MRTP Act
Competition conceptsexpressly defined; major
role for economic analysis
Provides for regulation of
combinations
Provides for advocacy
Power to impose penalty
Statutory authority can
seek CCIs(competition
commission of India)
Opinion
Government Departments
within its ambit.
Based on liberalized
Competition concepts notexpressly defined
No regulation of combinations
Has no advocacy role
No power to impose penalty
No provision for statutoryauthorities to seek opinion
Government Departmentsoutside its ambit.
Based on command
and control regime
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
21/53
21
The competition (Amendment)The competition (Amendment)
Act 2007Act 20071 Composition of the Competition
Commission of India (CCI)
2 Interface with other regulators
3 Establishment of Competition Appellate
Tribunal (The three-member Competition Appellate Tribunal
(CAT) became operational last October to hear cases against Indias
competition regulator, the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
The government also ordered it to hear cases that the Monopolies and
Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) had failed to
resolve when it was wound up last year. )
4 Leniency provision specific relief (The fourth major flaw is the
leniency provision, which had earlier read as a special relief to the first
party who spills the beans in a case of collusion (for instance, cartels),
and before the enquiry begins.)
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
22/53
22
ObjectivesObjectivesAct enacted, keeping in view economicdevelopment of the country, for the establish-ment of a commission to prevent practices
having adverse effect on competition, topromote and sustain competition in markets,
to protect the interest of consumers and toensure freedom of trade carried on by other
participants in the markets in India and formatters connected therewith or incidentalthereto
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
23/53
23
BenefitsBenefits
Economic Efficiencies
ConsumerWelfare (Both Price & Non-Price
determinants of consumer satisfaction) Lower prices, wider choice and better services
Fair Trading.
Prevention of excessive concentration
Efficientmarket system Accelerates economic Growth; higher productivity.
Generates innovation; dynamic efficiency.
Provides level playing field, re-dressal against anti-
com
petitive practices.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
24/53
24
Legislative developmentsLegislative developments
Sections 3 and 4 containing provisions as regardsprohibition of anti-competitive agreements andabuse of dominant position have been notified inMay 2009.
Section 66 relating to repeal of existing MRTP Actnotified with effect from 1st September 2009.
Ordinance issued as regards dissolution of MRTPCommission w.e.f. 14.10.2009.
Regulations on general working, business ofCommission, engagement of experts, determinationof costs, leniency provisions notified;
Sections 5 and 6 relating to combinations are yet tobe notified.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
25/53
25
Amendments under IndianAmendments under Indian
Com
petition Act 2002Com
petition Act 2002 The Indian Competition Act prohibits any agreement
which causes, or is likely to cause, appreciableadverse effect on competition in markets in India.
Any such agreement is void.As perSection 2(b) agreement has an inclusive
definition and includes any arrangement orunderstanding or action in concert whether or not;.
Such agreement, understanding or action is formalor in writing.
Such agreement, understanding or action isintended to be enforceable by legal proceedings.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
26/53
26
CERTAIN IMPORTANTCERTAIN IMPORTANT
PROVISIONSPROVISIONSFactors to be looked into while inquiringdominant position - Section 19(4) such asmarket share, size, resources, consumer,integration etc.Relevant Geographical marketRelevant Product MarketProvision on abuse of dominanceProvision on Horizontal agreements andCartelsProvision on Vertical agreementsSafeguard of IPR Commission & its power
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
27/53
27
Provisions on Abuse ofProvisions on Abuse ofDominanceDominance
As perSection 4 of Indian Competition Act, enterprises orgroups are prohibited from abusing their dominant position.
The Act defines dominant position as a position of strength,enjoyed by an enterprise, in the relevant market in India ,which enables it to
Operate independently of the competitive forces prevailing inthe relevant market
Affect its competitors or consumers or the relevant market inits favour.
It is the ability of the enterprise to behave/act independently of
the market forces that determines dominant position. Dominance per se is not bad. However, its abuse has been
considered bad.
Abuse is stated to occur when an enterprise or a group usesits dominant position in the relevant market in an exclusionary
(e.g. denial ofmarket access) or/and an exploitative mannere. . excessive or discriminator ricin .
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
28/53
28
Provisions on Abuse ofProvisions on Abuse of
DominanceDominance Act provides that there shall be an abuse of dominant
position if an enterprise or group ;
i) Directly or indirectly , imposes unfair or discriminatory
Condition in purchase or sale of goods or services; or
Price in purchase or sale (including predatory price) of goodsor services
{However, discriminatory conditions/ price adopted to meetthe competition are not covered within the ambit of abuse }.
ii) limits or restricts ;
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
29/53
29
Provisions on Abuse ofProvisions on Abuse of
DominanceDominance Production of goods or provision of services ormarket;
or
Technical or scientific development relating to goodsor services to the prejudice of customers; or
iii) indulges in practice or practices resulting in denialofmarket access in any manner; or
iv) Makes conclusion of contracts subject to
acceptance by other parties of supplementaryobligations which, by their nature or according tocommercial usage, have no connection with thesubject of such contracts; or
v) Uses its dominant position in one relevant market toenter into, or protect, other relevant market.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
30/53
30
Provisions on Abuse ofProvisions on Abuse of
DominanceDominance Relevant Market has been defined in Section 2 (r) as market
which may be determined by the Commission with reference tothe relevant product market or the relevant geographic marketor with reference to both the markets.
Relevant Geographic Market has been defined in act as amarket comprising the area in which the conditions ofcompetition for supply of goods or provision of services ordemand of goods or services are distinctly homogeneous andcan be distinguished from the conditions prevailing in theneighbouring areas.
Relevant Product market has been defined in act as a marketcomprising all those products or services which are regarded asinterchangeable or substitutable by the consumer, by reason ofcharacteristics of the product or services, their price andintended use.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
31/53
31
Provisions on HorizontalProvisions on Horizontal
Agreements and CartelsAgreements and Cartels Cartels are in the nature of prohibited horizontal
agreements and are presumed to have appreciable
adverse effect on com
petition. Section 2 (c) defines Cartel to include an association
of producers, sellers, distributors, traders or serviceproviders who, by agreement amongst themselves,limit, control or attempt to control the production,distribution, sale or price of, or , trade in goods orprovisions of services.
In case of cartels/horizontal agreements , burden ofproof is on the defendant.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
32/53
32
Prohibition of AntiProhibition of Anti--CompetitiveCompetitive
agreements and Cartelsagreements and Cartels Section 3 of Competition Act deals with anti-
competitive agreements
- both horizontal and
- vertical. No enterprise or associations of enterprises or person
or associations of persons shall enter into anyagreement in respect of production , supply,distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods orprovision of services:-- which causes or
- is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect
- on competition within India.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
33/53
33
Prohibition of AntiProhibition of Anti--CompetitiveCompetitiveagreements and Cartelsagreements and Cartels
PROVISIONS AS REGARDS HORIZONTAL AGREEMENTS Any agreement entered into between enterprises or
associations of enterprises or persons or associations ofpersons or between any person and enterprises or practicecarried on, or decisions taken by, any association of enterprises
or association of persons , including cartels, engaged inidentical or similar trade of goods or provision of services, shallbe presumed to have appreciable adverse effect on competitionand therefore void if it :
directly or indirectly determines purchase or sales prices.
lim
its or controls production, supply,m
arkets, technicaldevelopment, investment or provision of services.
shares the market or source of production or provision ofservices by way of allocation of geographical area ofmarket, ortype of goods or services, or number of customers in themarket or any other similar way.
directly or indirectly results in bid rigging or collusive bidding.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
34/53
34
Provisions on HorizontalProvisions on Horizontal
Agreements and CartelsAgreements and Cartels Exceptions in the case of Horizontal agreements
Provisions ofSection 3 on prohibition of anti-competitiveagreements shall not apply to any agreement entered into by
way of joint ventures if such agreement increases efficiency inproduction, supply, distribution, storage , acquisition or controlof goods or provision of services.
CARTELS
Cartels are agreem
ents between enterprises not to com
pete onprice, product or customers.
Objective of cartel is to raise price above competitive levels,resulting in injury to consumers and to economy.
Cartel formation impacts consumers as it results in higher
prices, poor quality and restricted choice.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
35/53
35
ProvisionsProvisions -- vertical Agreementsvertical Agreements Any agreement amongst enterprises or persons at different
stages or levels of the production chain in different markets ,in respect of production , supply, distribution, storage, sale orprice of, or trade in goods or provision of services, including
Tie-in agreement
Exclusive supply agreement Exclusive distribution agreement
Refusal to deal
Resale price maintenance
Shall be anti-competitive agreement if such agreementscauses or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect oncompetition in India.
Rule of Reason approach in case of vertical agreementsunlike presumptions in case of horizontal agreements.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
36/53
36
Factors to be looked into in ACAFactors to be looked into in ACA --Section 19(3)Section 19(3)
The Commission shall , while determining whether anagreement has an appreciable adverse effect on
competition have due regard to all or any of the following
factors;
Creation of barriers to new entrants in the market Driving existing competitors out of the market
Foreclosure of competition by hindering entry into the market
Accrual of benefits to the consumers
Im
provem
ents in the production or distribution of goods orprovisions of services
Promotion of technical, scientific and economic development bymeans of production or distribution of goods or provisions ofservices
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
37/53
37
Exceptions to Section 3Exceptions to Section 3 Section 3 shall not restrict ; the right of any person to restrain any infringement of, or to
impose reasonable conditions as may be necessary forprotecting any of his following Intellectual Property Rights
as under; Copyright Act,1857
Patents Act, 1970
Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 or Trade Marks
Act, 1999 Geographic Indications of Goods ( Registration and
Protection) Act, 1999
Designs Act, 2000
Semi-conductor Integrated Circuits Lay Design Act, 2000
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
38/53
38
Intellectual Property RightsIntellectual Property Rights
under Indian CA , 2002under Indian CA , 2002 IPRs provide exclusive rights to the holders to perform a
productive or commercial activity.
However, this does not automatically include the right to exert
restrictive orm
onopoly power in am
arket. An intellectual property right generates market power; thus, a
check is required to see whether there is abuse ofmarketpower.
There is , however, also a need for protection of property
holders rights to encourage investment in new ideas,innovations which may benefit the consumers
Balance between abuse ofmarket power and protection ofpropertys holders right is, therefore, required.
Intellectual Property Right lessens competition while
competition law ensures and encourages competition
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
39/53
39
Intellectual Property RightsIntellectual Property Rightsunder Indian CA , 2002under Indian CA , 2002
Indian Competition law provides for scrutiny andexamination of all those acts during the exercise ofProperty Rights, which may be detrimental tocompetition in the market or interest of consumers.
Reasonable conditions as may be necessary forprotecting IPRs during their exercise would not beof the nature of anti-competitive agreements.
However, conditions which are not reasonable withreference to bundle of rights that go with IPRs andwhich are likely to affect adversely the prices,quantities, quality or varieties of goods or serviceswill fall within the contour of competition law.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
40/53
40
Intellectual Property RightsIntellectual Property Rights
under Indian CA , 2002under Indian CA , 2002Few practices which may be termed as restrictive andimposing unreasonable conditions;
Licensing arrangement which includes restraints thatadversely affect competition in markets by dividing the
markets among firms that would have competed usingdifferent technologies.
Arrangement that effectively merges the R&D activities oftwo or only a few entities that would plausibly engage inR&D in the relevant fields might harm competition fordevelopment of new goods and services.
Exclusive licensing including cross licensing by partiescollectively possessing market power
Patent Pooling by firms and agreement not to grant licensesto third parties while fixing quotas and prices at the sametime
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
41/53
41
Intellectual Property RightsIntellectual Property Rights
under Indian CA , 2002under Indian CA , 2002 Tie-in arrangements a licensee may be required to acquire
particular goods (e.g.raw materials or intermediate goodswhich are unpatented) from patentee foreclosing theopportunities of other producers.
Payment of royalty even after the patent has expired orpayment even for unpatented know-how as well.
Conditions not to challenge the validity of IPR in question.
Requirement of granting back to the licensor any know-how or
IPR acquired and not to anyone else. Fixing prices by licensor at which licensee should sell.
Restriction of territory or categories of customers by licensor.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
42/53
42
Intellectual Property RightsIntellectual Property Rights
under Indian CA , 2002under Indian CA , 2002 Taking package licensing , not only one license, as
may be required.
Undue restriction on licensees business. Limiting the maximum amount of use of license
Conditions of using employees or staff of licensoror designated employees or staff of licensor.
An enterprise , which enjoys dominant position byvirtue of IPR , if it engages in conduct consideredabuse in terms of Section 4 , shall not enjoy any
immunity.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
43/53
43
Exception to Section 3Exception to Section 3 --ExportExport
CartelsCartels Section 32 of Indian Competition Act also takes into account
cartel related activities taking place outside India having effecton competition in India extra-territorial reach.
Export Cartels are made up of enterprises based in one countrywith an agreement to cartelise markets in other countries.
However, export cartels are out of the purview ofSection 3 .
Section 3 (5) (ii) of the Competition Act, 2002 contains asunder;
Nothing contained in this section shall restrict-
(ii) the right of any person to export goods from India to theextent to which the agreement relates exclusively to theproduction, supply, distribution or control of goods or provisionof services for such export
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
44/53
44
Remedies and PenaltiesRemedies and Penalties Commission is empowered to inquire into cases of
anti-competitive agreements, cartels and abuse ofdominant position
either on its ownm
otion or on receipt of inform
ationor on reference made to it by the CentralGovernment orState Govt. or statutory authority.
In case the Commission is convinced that primafacie case exists , it shall direct the Director General
to inquire and furnish report. Director General for the purpose of inquiries is
vested with the powers of civil court besides powersto conduct search and seizure.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
45/53
45
Enquiry and order by theEnquiry and order by the
commissioncommission After inquiry if contravention is established, the
Commission may pass all or any of the following orders; direct any enterprise or associations of enterprises or person or
associations of persons to discontinue and not to re-enter suchagreement or discontinue abuse of dominant position
impose such penalty as it may deem fit not exceeding 10% ofthe average of the turnover for the last three preceding financialyears upon each of person or enterprise
(if any anti-competitive agreement was entered into by cartel, itmay impose upon each producer, seller, distributor, trader, or
service provider included in that cartel, a penalty of up to threetimes of its profit for each year of the continuance of suchagreement or ten percent of its turnover for each year of thecontinuance of such agreement, which ever is higher.)
Direct that agreements shall stand modified to the extent and in
the manner as may be specified in the order of theCommission.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
46/53
46
Power of the comm
issionPower of the comm
ission Direct the enterprises concerned to abide by such other orders
as the Commission may pass and comply with the directions,including payment of costs, if any.
Pass any other order or issue directions as it may deem fit. Order for division of an enterprise enjoying dominant position .
Ordermay provide for all or any of the following matters;
Transfer or vesting of property, rights, liabilities or obligations
Adjustment of contracts either by discharge or reduction of any
liability or obligation or otherwise Creation, allotment, surrender, or cancellation of any shares,
stocks or securities
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
47/53
47
Power of the comm
issionPower of the comm
ission Formation or winding up of an enterprise oramendment ofmemorandum or articles ofassociation or any other instruments regulating thebusiness of any enterprise
extent to which, and the circumstances in which,provisions of the ordermay be altered by theenterprise and registration thereof
Any othermatter which may be necessary to give
effect to the division of the enterprise. Commission also could issue any interim order
Commission could levy lesser penalty
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
48/53
48
Threshold LimitsThreshold LimitsThe Act also provides for threshold limits and accordingto which an enterprise ( No group) could be of 1000crores asset with 3000 crores turnover in IndiaIn case of group the limits are 4000 crores and 12000crores
In case the enterprise or group is having business inIndia and outside India, the limits would be
For No group
- Assets $ 500 Million and 500 crores- Turnover $ 1500 Million and 1500 croresFor Group
- Assets $ 2000 Million and 500 crores- Turnover $ 6000 Million and 1500 crores
The above limits are subject to revision every 2 years
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
49/53
49
Competition Policy andCompetition Policy and
AdvocacyAdvocacy Competition Policy goes beyond mere Competition
Laws. Competition Advocacy has been defined as
.. those activities conducted by the competitionauthority related to the promotion of a competitiveenvironment for economic activities by means of non-enforcementmechanisms,mainly through its
relationships with other governm
ental entities and byincreasing public awareness of the benefits ofcompetition.
(AdvocacyWorking Group of the International
Competition Network ).
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
50/53
50
Competition Policy andCompetition Policy and
AdvocacyAdvocacy Section 49 of Indian CA contains specific
provisions of competition advocacy.
Central Govt. orState Govt. while formulatingmaymake a reference to the Commission,
and the Commission shall within sixty days
give its opinion .
The Commission is also empowered to takesuitable measures for the promotion of
competition advocacy on its own.
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
51/53
51
Further reference on this subjectFurther reference on this subject
Indian Competition Act, Rules and
Regulations are at the
website
www.cci.gov.in
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
52/53
52
WHENWE MEET NEXTWHENWE MEET NEXT
TIMETIMENEXT SESSION ON
WEDNESDAY 9 DECEMBER 2009
TOPICS
Presentation by you
in groups for internal assessments
on topics agreed upon
(15m
arks)
-
8/9/2019 S- 4 CompetAct (MktgA X201) 2 Dec 09
53/53
53
THANK YOU