Keeping up with Competition - June 2024
A monthly newsletter by Axiom5
Welcome to the ninth issue of Keeping up with Competition, our monthly newsletter. We recap the events in the world of Indian competition law and policy in May 2024.
Detailed summaries of orders passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) can be accessed here.
The CCI unveils revamped confidentiality ring mechanism, streamlining the disposal process
On 10 May 2024, the CCI notified the Competition Commission of India (General) Amendment Regulations, 2024 amending regulations 35, 37, and 50 of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009. Pursuant to the amendment, parties before the CCI must now self-certify their confidentiality claims through affidavits. Submitting a false affidavit in a legal proceeding may result in a finding of a breach of Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The "confidentiality ring" mechanism, which allows parties involved in investigations before the CCI to access confidential information and documents from other parties to protect their right to self-defence, has also been amended. Previously, the CCI had the sole discretion to determine who could be part of a confidentiality ring. Parties now are empowered to request inclusion in a confidentiality ring within seven days of receiving the Director General's investigation report. To prevent unnecessary delays in the adjudication process, timeframes have also been established for submitting affidavits after being added to the confidentiality ring and requesting access to confidential records.
Merger control - a snapshot
The CCI approved 8 combinations and published 6 detailed orders in May (the summaries of these orders are available here). The CCI received 16 new notices, of which 1 notice was under the green channel.
Behavioural cases
The CCI issued closure orders in three cases. In A V Satheeshkumar, the CCI did not assess any relevant market as it did not find any competition concerns in the information provided to it. In Harmit Ahuja, the CCI assessed Maruti Suzuki India Limited’s presence in the SUV segment of the passenger vehicle market, finding that it does not hold a dominant position and its practices do not constitute anti-competitive behaviour. In Metallurgical Products India Private Limited, the CCI closed the matter noting that the opposite parties - Department of Atomic Energy and IREL (India) Ltd. - were not “enterprise” under Section 2(4) of the Competition Act, 2002.