|
Date
|
Notification/Order No.
|
Section/Regulation
|
|
|
26-Mar-14
|
Combination
Registration No. C-2014/01/148 |
5(a) of the Competition Act, 2002
|
|
|
In the said
order, CCI approved the acquisition acquisition of certain brands of Elder Pharmaceuticals Limited, in India and Nepal, by Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited in various therapeutic segments of Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited. However, CCI directed the parties to make certain modifications in the agreement executed between them with respect to non-compete clause so as to make it reasonable. |
|||
|
26-Mar-14
|
Case Nos. 07
& 30 of 2012 |
Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002
|
|
An
information filed a information with the CCI against M/s Google Inc. and M/sGoogle India Private Limited (collectively “Google”) alleging that Google runs its core business of online search and search advertising in a discriminatory manner, causing harm to advertisers and indirectly to consumers and creating an uneven playing field by favouring its own services and of its vertical partners, by manipulating the search algorithms. It was also alleged that Google provides a number of vertical search services like YouTube, Google News, Google Maps etc. and in order to promote its vertical search services, it mixes many of vertical results into organic search results. The effect of such manipulation of results was that Google‟s vertical search partners will appear predominantly when an internet user searches for some information, irrespective of whether the search results are most popular or relevant. Google‟s vertical search partners will appear predominantly when an internet user searches for some information, irrespective of whether the search results are most popular or relevant. Based on the aforesaid information, the CCI opined that there exists prima facie case against Google for contravention of section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 (abuse of dominance) and director the DG to investigate into the matter. The inevstigations are still pending however during the course of investigations, Google and its officers did not cooperate and provide adequate information to the DG and accordingly CCI has imposed a penlaty of INR 1 crore on Google. |
||
|
28-Mar-14
|
F. No. CCI
/CD /Amend /Comb. Regl. /2014. |
The
Competition Commission of India (Procedure in regard to the transaction of business relating to combinations) Amendment Regulations, 2014 |
The regulations
prescribing the procedures pertaining to combinations under section 5 of the
Competition Act, 2002 have been amended. Following are the key amendments:
prescribing the procedures pertaining to combinations under section 5 of the
Competition Act, 2002 have been amended. Following are the key amendments:
(a) New sub clause
5 to Regulation 9 has been incorporated. As per the new sub-clause the
requirement of filing merger notice shall be determined with respect to the
substance of the transaction and any
structure of the transaction(s), comprising a combination, that has the effect
of avoiding notice in respect of the whole or a part of the combination shall
be disregarded.
5 to Regulation 9 has been incorporated. As per the new sub-clause the
requirement of filing merger notice shall be determined with respect to the
substance of the transaction and any
structure of the transaction(s), comprising a combination, that has the effect
of avoiding notice in respect of the whole or a part of the combination shall
be disregarded.
(b)
the merger notice filing fee for Form I has been
increased from INR 10 lakhs to INR 15 lakhs and for Form II has been increased
to INR 50 lakhs from INR 40 lakhs.
the merger notice filing fee for Form I has been
increased from INR 10 lakhs to INR 15 lakhs and for Form II has been increased
to INR 50 lakhs from INR 40 lakhs.
(c)
Regulation 29 has been omitted. Regulation 29
provided the right to appeal against the orders of CCI. This regulation was anyway redundant as this
right is availabe under section 53B of the ompetition Act, 2002.
Regulation 29 has been omitted. Regulation 29
provided the right to appeal against the orders of CCI. This regulation was anyway redundant as this
right is availabe under section 53B of the ompetition Act, 2002.
(d) Category 10 of
Schedule I (which prescribes the circumstances in which merger notifiaction is
not required) which provided that any combination which occured outside India
with no local nexus in India need not be notified in India, has now been
deleted. This category was anyway redundant as in such cases, CCI has no locus
in any case
Schedule I (which prescribes the circumstances in which merger notifiaction is
not required) which provided that any combination which occured outside India
with no local nexus in India need not be notified in India, has now been
deleted. This category was anyway redundant as in such cases, CCI has no locus
in any case
Formats of Form I and Form II have also been slightly amended.
