GOOGLE v. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA, in regard to Competition Laws in India.
Name – Ananya P Rau
University – University Law College, Bangalore University.
Introduction
Competition law, also known as antitrust law in some jurisdictions, is a legal framework designed to promote fair and open competition in the marketplace. The primary goal of competition law is to prevent anticompetitive practices that may harm consumers, stifle innovation, and undermine the efficiency of markets. These regulations are necessary to keep markets competitive, give companies fair play, and promote economic expansion. Mergers and acquisitions are examined by competition authorities to make sure they don’t significantly reduce market competition. A planned merger can come under regulatory examination or could be banned if it has the potential to monopolise the market or drastically restrict competition. By encouraging competitive marketplaces, competition legislation ultimately seeks to safeguard consumers. Consumers gain from increased competition since it typically results in cheaper costs, better goods and services, and more innovation. By prohibiting actions that can restrict the amount of information available to customers or other market participants, competition law promotes market openness. This includes measures against false advertising and deceptive practices. Enforcement of competition law typically involves regulatory bodies, such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the United States or the European Commission in the European Union. These agencies investigate complaints, review mergers, and take legal action against entities engaging in anticompetitive behaviour. Penalties for violating competition law can include fines, injunctions, and in some cases, criminal prosecution for individuals involved in serious antitrust violations.
Competition Commission of India
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is the governing authority responsible for enforcing competition laws and regulations in India. It was established under the Competition Act of 2002, and it became fully functional in 2009.
The CCI was established to enhance fair competition and prevent practices that adversely affect competition in Indian markets. It operates under the legal framework provided by the Competition Act of 2002. The primary objectives of the CCI include preventing anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant positions by enterprises, and regulating combinations (mergers and acquisitions) to ensure they do not have an adverse impact on competition. The CCI is responsible for investigating and addressing anti-competitive practices, reviewing mergers and acquisitions, and promoting competition advocacy. It has the authority to establish penalties on entities found in violation of competition laws. The CCI has jurisdiction over the whole of India and covers all sectors and industries. It has the authority to investigate and take action against both public and private enterprises. The CCI has investigative and quasi-judicial powers. It can conduct inquiries into alleged anti-competitive practices, hear complaints, and pass orders to address competition concerns. The CCI’s decisions can be appealed to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and, subsequently, to the Supreme Court of India. In pursuance to its enforcement activities, the CCI engages in competition advocacy to foster a culture of healthy competition. This involves creating awareness about the benefits of competition and providing guidance to businesses and other stakeholders.
The most notable case in terms of competition law was the famous case of Google v. CCI. The competition commission of India, in this case accused Google, of market dominance. It is a well known fact many google driven applications are pre-installed on Android systems and consumers are unable to uninstall these applications. The CCI, accused Google of Market Dominance, pertaining to restraining other search engines to compete in the market. This practice of Google LLC, was found to be in contravention of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002, which governs the abuse of dominant position in the market. It was contended that Google dominated 98% of the Indian market. The Competition Commission of India accused Google of Digital Slavery and feudalism, consumer exploitation, technological captivity and chokehold capitalism. The CCI imposed a punishment of Rs.1337 crore over Google’s activity. Hearing both sides the court held that the CCI had calculated the total revenue arising for google out different agreements throughout Indian Android Operating System Market, and upheld the CCI’s order against Google.
Conclusion
In summary, fair and competitive markets, consumer welfare, and the prevention of anticompetitive behaviour are all made possible by antitrust or competition laws. These laws’ main tenets and goals are to disallow monopolies and the misuse of dominant positions, prevent cartels and collusion, control mergers to prevent harm to competition, promote market transparency, and foster international collaboration. Ensuring that enterprises operate on an even playing field, avoiding market distortions, and providing consumers with a range of options at fair pricing all depend on the effective enforcement of competition laws. It is the duty of regulatory agencies, like the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and analogous establishments in other regions, to look into, deal with, and, if required, penalise anticompetitive activity.
