competition law research topics india

Maximum word limit (including research questions, methodology, conclusion, and foot notes)

Research Paper: 8000 words
Article: 6000 words
Book Review: 2500 words

Document format

Word

Name of submitted file

Title of the paper

Size of the paper

A4

Margin

2.54 cm (1 inch) on all sides

Font style

Book Antiqua

Font size

11-point font

Line spacing

Double-spacing (2.0)

Paragraph spacing

0-point and left-aligned

Formatting for the title of the paper

20-point, bold, centre-aligned, and title case (capitalise each word)

Author Details

Details of Authors should be mentioned only on the first/title page of the paper in the following manner:
11-point, Italic, Centre aligned Just below the title:
Full name
Designation
Organisation
In the footnotes: Email Id (optional)
Contact number (optional)

Headings

11-point, bold, centre-aligned, title case

Subheadings

Level 1 subheading: 11-point, bold, left-aligned, title case

Level 2 subheading: 11-point, bold italic, left-aligned, title case

Level 3 subheading: 11-point, bold, indented, title case

Level 4 subheading: 11-point, bold italic, indented, title case

Page number

Top right corner

Table number

The table number (e.g., Table 1) appears above the table title and body in bold font.

Name/title and number of table

The table title appears one double- spaced line below the table number, in title case.

Figures/graphs/images

The figure number (e.g., Figure 1) appears above the figure title and image in bold font.

Name and number of figures/graphs/ images

The figure title appears one double- spaced line below the figure number, in title case.

Source/Other Notes of table/figures/graphs/images

Three types of notes (general, specific, and probability) can appear below the figure to describe contents of the figure that cannot be understood from the figure title, image, and/or legend alone (e.g., definitions of abbreviations, copyright attribution, explanations of asterisks use to indicate p values). Include figure notes only as needed.

Symbols

Must be defined

Abbreviations

Must be defined

Referencing style

APA 7th edition (see https://apastyle. apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/ references/examples )

Aims & Scope

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) is a statutory body established under the Competition Act, 2002, with the objective of preventing practices having adverse effect on competition, promoting and sustaining competition in markets, protecting the interests of consumers, and ensuring freedom of trade carried on by other participants within markets in India. CCI is also mandated to take suitable measures for the promotion of competition advocacy and spreading awareness about competition issues. In furtherance of the above, as a public institution, CCI encourages scholarship in the field of competition law and policy to develop a better understanding of competition issues relevant to the Indian context and draw inferences for the implementation of competition law to create a culture of competition in India. CCI’s journal, Competition Commission of India Journal on Competition Law and Policy , is published annually to this end.

The journal aims to encourage research and debate on contemporary issues in the field of competition law to develop a better understanding of competition issues relevant to the Indian context and draw inferences for the implementation of competition law in India. The journal covers a wide range of themes. Research papers, articles, case studies, and book reviews based on empirical research on the following themes in the Indian context are encouraged for submission:

• Market definition, measuring market power, and abuse of dominance Covering issues such as empirical methods of defining markets, measuring market power, assessment of exclusionary unilateral conduct, etc.
• Vertical restraints and competition Vertical restraints can have many pro-competitive as well as anti-competitive effects. Papers may explore areas such as resale price maintenance, assignment of exclusive territories or exclusive dealing, tying and bundling, and circumstances under which these restrictions have anti-competitive effects.
• Horizontal agreements and cartelization Prohibition of collusive conduct of firms is a key component of competition law. Papers may explore issues such as the economics of collusion, information exchange, price signalling, facilitating factors for cartels, detecting and discouraging cartels, etc.
• Economics of platform markets and challenges for antitrust enforcement New digital products and business models as well as the special characteristics of digital markets have created novel challenges for enforcement and competition policy. Papers may explore the tools and techniques offered by economics to assess competition issues in platform markets.
• Intellectual Property Rights and competition law Competition law is concerned not with the legitimate exercise of IP rights but with the efforts of holders of this right to expand their scope either to new products or beyond a certain time, or by conditioning access to the right on restrictions. Papers may explore areas of recent concerns in IP, such as competition law interface.
• Price and non-price effects of mergers Economic analysis plays an important role in merger review. Papers may focus on recent developments in estimating the effects of mergers (merger simulation, diversion ratios, pricing pressure indices, etc.), including innovation and welfare effects such as vertical or conglomerate mergers and issues in the use of appropriate remedies, i.e., the adoption of structural and/or behavioural remedies.
• Any other issues related to competition policy and law

Advertisement

The Use of Competition Law as a Mechanism of Corporate Governance in India

• Published: 04 August 2023
• Volume 45 , pages 49–72, ( 2024 )

Cite this article

• Anuradha Roy Chowdhury   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-9210 1  

209 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Competitiveness is a key requirement for modern companies to survive. Effective corporate governance practices are also fast emerging as a fundamental obligation owed to shareholders and other stakeholders. The connection between competition and good corporate governance is derived from the product market competition hypothesis (PMCH) that projects the idea that operating in competitive markets would increase x-efficiency and decrease agency costs in companies, leading to superior corporate governance. Although a significant amount of work, both theoretical and empirical has been carried out on the efficacy of the PMCH, none of the research has been conclusive. Moreover, there has been no concentrated effort into determining the impact of the PMCH on the specific types of agency problems that are endemic to companies with largely concentrated shareholding structures like India. The paper highlights that a part of the reason behind the waning and unconvincing research on the PMCH (specially in India) has been the focus on competitiveness as an abstract concept or empirical construct, rather than on the regulatory aspect of competition, that is, competition law. This paper examines the connection between competition law and corporate governance, specifically the utility of competition regulation in being used to improve corporate governance in companies. It also considers the effectiveness of competition law in dispelling some of the pervasive Indian corporate governance problems such as tunneling and inefficient related party transactions. Some of the methods that are considered which would have such an impact and thus are recommended by the researcher, are a redefinition of ‘dominant position’ in the competition law discourse, to include within it pyramidical groups of companies as well as viewing tunneling practices as having an ‘appreciable adverse effect’ on competition. Doing so would result in numerous efficiencies as competition law could be used to kill two birds with one stone: increasing both competitiveness and good corporate governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Centros and Defensive Regulatory Competition: Some Thoughts and a Glimpse at the Data

Competition laws, ownership, and corporate social responsibility

Corporate Governance, Product Market Competition and Firm Performance: Evidence from India

Availability of data and materials.

Duly cited.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Competition Act 2002, s 19 (a).

Competition Act 2002, s 53 N (1).

Competition Act 2002, s 3(1).

Competition Act 2002, s 4, explanation (a).

Competition Act s 4(2) (a).

Competition Act 2002, explanation to s 4, emphasis added.

Bharti Airtel Limited v Reliance Industries Limited & Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited ( 2017 ) Case No. 3 of 2017 (CCI).

ibid Para 22.

Re Lifestyle Equities C.V. v Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd ( 2020 ) Case No. 9 of 2020 (CCI).

The Competition Commission of India (Procedure in regard to the transaction of business relating to combinations) Regulations ( 2011 ).

Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2012] OJ C326/47 (TFEU).

Governed by the Competition Act 1998, the Enterprise Act 2002 and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013.

Section 166 (3) of the Companies Act 2013 stresses that ‘A director of a company shall exercise his duties with due and reasonable care, skill and diligence and shall exercise independent judgment.’.

Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, s 46, Enterprise Act 2002.

8 (a)(1) of the Clayton Act of 2006 states that ‘No person shall, at the same time, serve as a director or officer in any two corporations (other than banks, banking associations, and trust companies) that are-

(A) engaged in whole or in part in commerce; and (B) by virtue of their business and location of operation, competitors, so that the elimination of competition by agreement between them would constitute a violation of any of the antitrust laws ….’.

Companies Act 2013, s 165.

Securities and Exchange Board of India.

Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act 1980, Act No. 3320 (as amended by Act No.11937 in 2013), Article 23.

Afsharipour, Afra. 2009. Corporate Governance Convergence: Lessons from the Indian Experience. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 29: 335.

Google Scholar  

Agarwal, Muskan. 2018. Non-dominant Enterprises’ Offers and Schemes: Predatory Pricing or Not? IndiaCorpLaw Blog . https://indiacorplaw.in/2018/12/non-dominant-enterprises-offers-schemes-predatory-pricing-not.html . Accessed 20 Feb 2022.

Alchian, Armen A. 1950. Uncertainty, Evolution and Economic Theory. Journal of Political Economy 58: 211.

Article   Google Scholar  

Allen, Franklin. 2005. Corporate Governance in Emerging Economies. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 21 (2): 164.

Allen, Franklin, and Gale, Douglas. 2000. Corporate Governance and Competition. In Corporate Governance: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives, ed. Xavier Vives. Cambridge University Press.

Arden Justice, Mary. 2003. Foreword: The Challenge of Corporate Governance. The Journal of Corporate Law Studies 3: 1.

Becht, Marco, Bolton, Patrick, and Röell, Ailsa. 2005. Corporate Governance and Control. ECGI Working Paper in Finance 02/2002. https://ecgi.global/sites/default/files/working_papers/documents/SSRNid343461.pdf . Accessed 1 Apr 2023

Bena, Jan, and Ting Xu. 2017. Competition and Ownership Structure of Closely-Held Firms. The Review of Financial Studies 30 (5): 1583.

Berle, Adolf and Means, Gardiner. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. Transaction Publishers.

Bhattacharjea, Aditya. 2008. India’s New Competition Law: A Comparative Assessment. Journal of Competition Law & Economics 4 (3): 609.

Bushman, Robert, Qi. Chen, Ellen Engel, and Abbie Smith. 2004. Financial Accounting Information, Organizational Complexity and Corporate Governance Systems. Journal of Accounting and Economics 37: 167.

Cadbury, Adrian. 1992 . Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance.

Chandrashekhar, Srinivasan, and Muralidharan, K. 2012. Networks of Power and Influence: Board Interlocks in India 1995–2007: An Empirical Investigation. Indian Institute of Management Bangalore Working Paper no: 374.

Chou, Julia, et al. 2011. Product market competition and corporate governance. Review of Development Finance 1: 114.

Deakin, Simon, and Alan Hughes. 1999. Economic Efficiency and the Proceduralisation of Company Law. Financial and Insolvency Law Review 3: 169.

Dunne, Niamh. 2015. Competition Law and Economic Regulation-Making and Managing Markets . Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dyck, Alexander, and Luigi Zingales. 2004. Private Benefits of Control: An International Comparison. The Journal of Finance 59 (2): 537.

Economic Times, ‘Definition of ‘Tunneling’. https://m.economictimes.com/definition/tunneling . Accessed 17 2022.

Editorial. 2007. Tricks of the Trade, The Economist. London.

Gilson, Ronald J., and Jeffrey N. Gordon. 2003. Doctrines and Markets: Controlling Controlling Shareholders. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 152: 785.

Hart, Oliver D. 1983. The Market Mechanism as an Incentive Scheme. The Bell Journal of Economics 14: 366.

Hayek, Friedrich A. 1984. The Meaning of Competition. In Individualism and Economic Order , ed. Friedrich A. Hayek. University of Chicago Press.

Jensen, Michael C., and William H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior. Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3 (4): 305.

Leibeinstein, Harvey. 1966. Allocative Efficiency v “X”- Efficiency. American Economic Review 46: 392.

Macey, Jonathan R. 2008. Corporate Governance: Promises Kept . Promises Broken Press: Princeton University.

Morck, Randall. 2009. The Riddle of the Great Pyramids’ National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 14858. https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=1376161 . Accessed 20 Aug 2019.

Morck, Randall. 2011. Finance and Governance in Developing Economies. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 16870 . https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1774263 . Accessed 20 Aug 2021.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. 2015.

Pacces, Alessio M. 2012. Rethinking Corporate Governance: The Law and Economics of Control Powers. Routledge.

Pant, Manoj and Pattanayak, Manoranjan. 2008. Corporate Governance and Competition: A Case Study of India. Jawaharlal Nehru University Discussion Papers in Economic s 09–02. https://www.jnu.ac.in/sites/default/files/Corporate_Governance.pdf . Accessed 1 Sept 2021.

Pargendler, Mariana. 2016. The Corporate Governance Obsession. Journal of Corporate Law. 42 (2): 359.

Petersen, Vidir. 2016. Interlocking Directorates in the European Union: An Argument for their Restriction. European Business Law Review 27 (6): 821.

Polinsky, A.M. and Shavell, S. (ed). 2007. Handbook of Law and Economics II. North Holland.

Sarkar, Jayati, and Subrata Sarkar. 2012. Corporate Governance in India . Sage Publications.

Schmidt, Johannes. 2010. The Case for a European Competition Disqualification Order. Zeitschrift Für Wettbewerbsrecht (ZWeR) 8 (4): 378.

Securities and Exchange Board of India. 2017. Kotak Committee Report on Corporate Governance.

Selarka, Ekta. 2014. Corporate Governance, Product Market Competition and Firm Performance: Evidence from India. In Corporate Governance in Emerging Markets: Theories, Practices and Cases , ed. Sabari Boubaker and Duc Khuong Nguyen. Springer.

Sheikh, Saleem, and William M. Rees. 1992. Corporate governance and corporate control: Self-regulation or statutory codification ? . International Company and Commercial Law Review 3 (11): 370.

Shleifer, Andrei, and Robert W. Vishny. 1997. A Survey of Corporate Governance. The Journal of Finance 52 (2): 737.

Stigler, George J. 1958. The Economies of Scale. The Journal of Law and Economies 1: 54.

Thepot, Florence.2014. The Interaction between Competition Law and Corporate Governance: Opening the ‘Black Box’’ . Doctoral Thesis, University College of London . http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1456752/ . Accessed 1 Sept 2021.

Varottil, Umakanth. 2009. A Cautionary Tale of the Transplant Effect on Indian Corporate Governance. National Law School of India Review 21: 1.

Varottil, Umakanth. 2020. Shareholder Stewardship in India: The Desiderata. NUS Law Working Paper 2020/005.

Vardhan, Vikas. 2015. Major Shareholders of Indian Stock Market. Value Research . https://www.valueresearchonline.com/story/h2_storyView.asp?str=28417#prettyPhoto . Accessed 17 Feb 2022.

Waller, Spencer W. 2011. Corporate Governance and Competition Policy. George Mason Law Review 18: 833.

Whish, Richard and Bailey, David. 2012. Competition Law . OUP.

Yadav, Nandini. 2017. Airtel moves CCI against Reliance Jio’s 'predatory pricing. BGR India. https://www.bgr.in/news/airtel-moves-cci-against-reliance-jios-predatory-pricing/ . Accessed 15 Feb 2022.

Clayton Act of 2006, United States of America.

Companies Act 2013, India.

Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, United Kingdom.

Competition Act 1998, United Kingdom.

Competition Act 2002, India.

The Competition Commission of India (Procedure in regard to the transaction of business relating to combinations) Regulations, 2011.

The Enterprise Act 2002, United Kingdom.

The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, United Kingdom.

SEBI (Listing Obligation and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015.

Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act 1980, Act No. 3320 (as amended by Act No.11937 in 2013). Korea.

Bharti Airtel Limited v Reliance Industries Limited & Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited [2017] Case No. 3 of 2017 (CCI).

Re Lifestyle Equities C.V. v Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. 2020. Case No. 9 of 2020 (CCI).

Meru Travel Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd [2021] Case No. 96 of 2015 (CCI).

Re: Vaibhav Mishra v Sppin India Pvt. Ltd. 2022. Case No. 1 of 2022 (CCI).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Xavier Law School, St. Xavier’s University, Kolkata, India

Anuradha Roy Chowdhury

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anuradha Roy Chowdhury .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Roy Chowdhury, A. The Use of Competition Law as a Mechanism of Corporate Governance in India. Liverpool Law Rev 45 , 49–72 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-023-09328-8

Download citation

Accepted : 25 May 2023

Published : 04 August 2023

Issue Date : April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-023-09328-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Corporate governance
• Competition law
• Product market competition hypothesis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• 25 Nov 2017
• 8 mins read

Systematizing Fairplay – Key Issues in the Indian Competition Law Regime

A case for revamping the extant competition law regime in India

Summary: The report identifies key structural and procedural issues with the present competition law framework in India and recommends action points to the Government and the Competition Commission of India.

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 inconceivable a decade ago.

The pace of innovation in high-technology disruptive markets has also presented unique problems for competition law by challenging the traditional understanding of concepts such as ‘market’, ‘monopoly’, ‘dominance’, and ‘agreement’. Another cause for concern is the current trend of creation of silos among regulators in India, wherein each regulator, be it the Competition Commission of India (CCI) or the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI’), unilaterally attempts to regulate enterprises in its domain. Lack of compliance with due process and principles of natural justice during investigation and decision-making by the Director General (DG) and the CCI has also been highlighted as one of the shortcomings of the present regime. To compound matters, the rapid pace of modern business has made timely adjudication of cases non-negotiable for the competition law framework to remain relevant. Given the intertwined relationship of competition law and the markets, in order for the law to remain relevant, it is imperative that it develops in line with market realities and revamps from time to time. Vidhi’s report ‘ Systematizing Fairplay – Key Issues in the Indian Competition Law Regime ‘ outlines key issues in the competition law regime in India that need to be addressed. The report also includes a snapshot of international best practice and key action points recommended for fairer competition law in India.

Revisiting CCI’s regulation-making power

Regulations framed by an authority in the exercise of powers granted by the enabling statute are a widely accepted form of delegated legislation. Several regulations have been framed by the CCI as well, in exercise of the powers conferred by the Competition Act.

However, a close scrutiny of the content of these regulations would reveal that, in certain cases, the limits of permissible delegation of legislative power are not adhered to. For example, the CCI (Procedure in regard to the transaction of business relating to combinations) Regulations, 2011 (‘Combinations Regulations’) exempt several transactions from the mandatory prior notification requirement under merger control provisions of the Competition Act. Neither is there any specific provision in the Competition Act that empowers the CCI to exempt combinations nor has any guidance been provided by the legislature for exercise of such power by CCI. It may be argued that in light of the above, these regulations are not a valid form of delegated legislation and are susceptible to a challenge to their constitutional validity.

Compliance with Due Process of Law by the CCI and DG

Even a brief analysis of competition law jurisprudence demonstrates several instances where the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) has noted non-compliance of principles of natural justice by the CCI and the DG. Examples include lack of a fair hearing to parties, failure to meet quorum requirements while passing orders, and abuse of search and seizure powers by the DG. For instance, in the Cement Cartel case ( COMPAT Order dated December 11, 2015 in Appeal no.105 of 2012 ) the Chairperson of the CCI became a party to the final order that imposed penalties of hefty amounts without being a part of the quorum which heard the arguments of the parties. To avoid such situations, in several jurisdictions overseas, the procedure to be followed during investigation and proceedings of competition authorities are laid down in detail. Eventually, confidence of the business community in competition law enforcement in India will erode if the CCI and the DG are perceived to be arbitrary in their approach with no regard to compliance with principles of natural justice and due procedure.

Overload on the office of the DG and need for the CCI to exercise discretion in ordering investigations

Data provided in the Annual Reports of the CCI demonstrate that contravention of the Competition Act was found in  only  about 50% of the cases ordered to be investigated by the CCI regarding violation of section 3 (anti-competitive agreements) and section 4 (abuse of dominance) of the Competition Act.  Studies suggest that unwarranted investigations by the DG have an adverse effect on businesses as they impair the reputation and prospects of a company even though it may be ultimately exonerated. The United Kingdom (UK) has adopted the ‘Prioritisation Principles’ of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to deal with the issue of burgeoning caseload on competition authorities. The Prioritisation Principles ensure that the CMA only investigates such complaints which would directly or indirectly affect UK’s desired competition law outcomes or are strategically significant or there is likelihood of a successful outcome within available resources. India must consider formulating similar principles to avoid wasting its limited regulatory bandwidth. Additionally, the CCI must record reasons in writing for ordering investigations by the DG. With respect to the DG, its office must be adequately staffed with experienced persons. Time, resources and reputation of businesses must not indented without concrete reasons for doing so.

Issues at the appellate stage

The Competition Act has a six-month indicative timeline for disposal of appeals. However, figures in the Annual Reports of the CCI suggest that over 46% cases remain pending with the appellate authority for over a year.

None of the relevant rules or regulations, including the CCI (General) Regulations, 2009, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (Form and Fee for Filing an Appeal and Fee for Filing Compensation Applications), Rules 2009 and the Competition Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Regulations, 2011 provide stage-wise timelines for the appellate process. The Companies Act ,  2013 (Companies Act) and the rules thereunder require the NCLAT to make every endeavour to dispose an appeal within three months from the date of filling but do not provide any indicative stage-wise timelines to dispose appeals. Moreover, unlike certain jurisdictions such as the UK and Singapore, there is no requirement in India for either the NCLAT or the CCI to conduct case management conferences which are known to maximise efficiency.

In fact, the NCLAT was originally envisaged as an appellate authority for only company law related appeals. Accordingly, section 411(3) of the Companies Act which provides for qualifications of a technical member of the NCLAT does not require her to possess expertise in competition law and policy or economics. Unsurprisingly, the profile of the present NCLAT members (as provided on NCLAT’s website) indicates that there is no technical member who has prior experience in the domain of  competition law and economics.  In this regard, reference may be made to the 272 nd  Report of the Law Commission of India which has recommended that  ‘appointments to specialised tribunals should comprise of persons of proven ability, integrity and standing having special knowledge and professional experience or expertise of not less than fifteen years in the particular field ‘.

Further, while the maximum permissible strength of the NCLAT is 11 members, it currently comprises only three members. Considering that the NCLAT is the appellate authority for the purposes of the Companies Act, the Insolvency and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Competition Act, there is an urgent need to appoint more members to ensure that the volume of appeals pending before the NCLAT does not spiral into an untameable problem as has been the experience with several other tribunals in India such as the  Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunals (CESTATs) and  Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs).

Interface with other sectoral regulators

The interface between competition policy and sector-specific regulation poses complex questions, particularly concerning the jurisdictional mandate for competition law issues. There have been several instances of turf conflicts between the CCI and various regulators and forum shopping by plaintiffs, stemming from a lack of clarity with respect to a delineation of roles and responsibilities between the CCI and sectoral regulators.

To homogenise decision making, it must be made mandatory for regulators to employ the cooperation/ consultation mechanism by necessary amendments to the Competition Act and sectoral laws. Moreover, following the example of the UK Enterprise Reform Act, the Central Government can lay down conclusively which regulator shall have primary jurisdiction in competition law matters in case of concurrent powers. Clarifying role of the CCI and sectoral regulators in competition law matters will prevent contradictory views being pronounced by various regulators and the resultant forum shopping.

Technology and competition law

Recent large scale mergers, particularly the Facebook/WhatsApp merger have encouraged discussions regarding the competition law impact of gaining control over ‘big data’ and its treatment as an asset in determining market power. Further, it has been observed that there is the risk that some algorithms with powerful predictive capacity will be able to collude and control markets without the need for any human intervention. In order to maintain competitive markets there must be periodic analysis and overhaul of competition law in the context of technological advances that have not been envisaged while formulating the law in its original form. The importance of conducting market studies to understand the effects of these technological developments on the Indian competition landscape cannot be over-emphasised in this regard. Efforts must also be made to build technical expertise among the competition law authorities by engaging expert advisors, participating in industry-wide coordinative processes and training exercises.

Filed Under

• Competition

About the Authors

Vedika was a Senior Resident Fellow and led Vidhi’s work in the field of Competition Law. She also led projects commissioned by various ministries in diverse areas including domestic and cross-border insolvency and company law for the Corporate Law and Financial Regulation team at Vidhi. Vedika completed her B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Gujarat National Law University in 2011 and an MCL from University of Cambridge in 2014.

Shehnaz is Senior Resident Fellow and Lead, ALTR. She works on emerging areas of policy and law on the intersection of finance, technology, and inclusion. At Vidhi, she has worked with several Ministries of the Government of India on matters relating to digital payments, financial regulation, commercial laws and business and human rights. Her independent research at Vidhi focuses on leveraging technological solutions to build a robust and inclusive financial system for all in India. Prior to joining Vidhi, she worked as an associate at the Financial Regulatory Practice at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Mumbai where her work focused on advising leading financial institutions (both Indian and multinational), including payment systems on legal and regulatory issues in India. She has also involved in several mergers and acquisitions in the financial space. She has also worked as an associate at the Dispute Resolution team at JSA, New Delhi. She writes frequently for the Oxford Business Law Blog and media outlets such as Hindu BusinessLine,Financial Express, MoneyControl, FirstPost, etc. She graduated from RML National Law University in 2011.

Param was a Research Fellow at Vidhi.

Debanshu is one of Vidhi’s Co-Founders. He has over a decade of experience in commercial laws and the financial sector and has advised the Government of India on several legislative projects in this space. He was instrumental in advising the Government on the design and drafting of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and its subsequent implementation. He has developed and curated Vidhi’s work on insolvency law, corporate law, financial regulation, and competition law and conceptualized its Bankruptcy Research Program. He has served as a member of a Government-appointed committee for operationalizing the National Company Law Tribunal and deposed before two Parliamentary committees examining financial sector legislation. He has also worked as a teaching fellow at Harvard Law School. He is an alumnus of the Harvard Law School, the University of Oxford, and Hidayatullah National Law University. He attended Harvard as a Fulbright Scholar and was awarded the Irving Oberman Memorial Prize in Bankruptcy and the Dean’s scholar prize in Corporations. He was also awarded a Distinction for his graduate studies at Oxford. In 2017, he was selected for NYU School of Law’s Hauser Global Scholarship, which he waived. His academic work has been published in peer-reviewed journals and an edited book published by Cambridge University Press, New York. He has been consulted by and mentioned in global business publications, such as IFR Asia and The Economist. Earlier, Debanshu practiced as an M&A and regulatory lawyer with AZB & Partners at its Mumbai and New Delhi offices.

Ritwika is a Senior Resident Fellow and Lead at Charkha, Vidhi’s Constitutional Law Centre. Her current research is focused on comparative federalism, local governments, and electoral reforms. From 2014-17, Ritwika was a Research Fellow in the Public Law vertical at Vidhi. She advised several departments and regulatory authorities under the Government of India, on questions concerning constitutional validity of proposed legislation, legislative competence of the Union and states, and contours of the powers and functions of regulators. Ritwika also assisted the Union of India in preparing its written submissions in the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Case. Between 2019-2020, Ritwika worked as a Research Associate at DAKSH, Bengaluru. She obtained her LL.M. from the University of Cambridge in 2018. She graduated with a B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)) from the Indraprastha University, Delhi in 2013, and the LL.M. from the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad in 2014. Ritwika is the co-editor of “Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court of India: Transparency, Accountability and Independence” (Oxford University Press, 2018), a volume of essays addressing the politics, doctrine, and crucial developments pertaining to judicial appointments in India.

Related Articles

• Bills, Reforms, Regulations

Fair and Competitive Digital Markets for India

The Report of the Committee on Digital Competition Law and the Draft Digital Competition Bill

• Submissions & Working Papers

Submissions to the Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce

On the subject ‘Promotion and Regulation of E-Commerce in India’.

Towards a Framework for Scrutinizing Combinations in the Digital Market –A Roadmap for Reform

Privacy overview.

• More Blog Popular
• Who's Who Legal
• Instruct Counsel
• My newsfeed
• Save & file
• View original
• Follow Please login to follow content.

add to folder:

• My saved (default)

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Find out more about Lexology or get in touch by visiting our About page.

Competition law in India - 2021, a year in review

The year 2021 has been quite enriching for the competition law regime in India with multiple investigations ordered into varied sectors such as technology, sports, cinema and automobile. The year ended with the Competition Commission of India (“ CCI ") directing an investigation into allegations of abuse of dominance by Apple in the market for app stores for iOS in India. [1] In addition to the investigations, the CCI has also imposed penalties worth millions of dollars on entities violating the Competition Act, 2002 (“ Act ”). This is particularly commendable as the CCI nimbly adapted to the changes necessitated by COVID-19 pandemic (“ pandemic ”), such as e-filings and virtual mode of hearings, and simultaneously regulated the competition landscape of the country pro-actively. Several steps were taken by the CCI during the year 2020 which are still in force with minor alterations. Despite the unpredictable changes it had to make, the CCI only tightened the noose on antitrust violators in the year 2021, as is evident from the data below:

• 7 orders were passed initiating investigations into anti-competitive conduct, only 1 of which was initiated suo moto, while the others were passed on the basis of information filed under Section 19(1)(a) (“ Private Enforcement ”). 6 investigations were mainly focused on allegations of abuse of dominance while 1 was focussed on vertical restraints. Conversely, the CCI dismissed 37 informations filed under Section 19 of which, only 1 was a reference made by a government department under Section 19(b). This hints towards an increasing awareness of competition law in India amongst private parties. However, the stark difference between the number of investigations ordered vis a vis those rejected, demonstrated the high scrutiny and thresholds followed by the CCI in directing investigations.
• In addition to cases dismissed at the outset, the CCI has also passed 7 orders closing the cases, after consideration of the investigation report of the Director General (“ DG ").
• Further, the CCI in 13 cases, found violations of the Act, out of which in 7 cases, it imposed a penalty in addition to ordering the parties to cease and desist from the anti-competitive behaviour. The amount of penalty imposed aggregated to a humongous INR 1,074 crores approximately [USD 143 million app.]. In the other 6 cases, the CCI only directed the contravening parties to cease the anti-competitive conduct and desist from indulging in it in future in light of the poor financial conditions of the parties which were mainly micro, small and medium enterprises (“ MSMEs ”).
• Out of the 13 cases, 9 pertained to anti-competitive horizontal agreements, 1 dealt with vertical restraints and 3 related to abuse of dominance.
• The CCI also adjudicated upon 4 requests to pass interim orders in the past year and found 3 of them fit for grant of interim measures.

In addition to enforcement orders, the CCI has also approved 57 combinations in the past year. This shows the high level of M&A activity in the country. In this article, from the large number of orders passed as an ex-post enforcer, we will briefly discuss the major highlights of the year gone by.

Antitrust Enforcement at a glance

The CCI’s stance on cartel and changing penalty trend

Cartel enforcement by the CCI showed an interesting trend where the level of scrutiny of cartelists remained as intense as always. Since the onset of the pandemic in 2020, the CCI has exhibited an empathetic approach and refrained from penalising MSMEs in five cases and closed the cases with cease-and-desist orders. [2] On the contrary, the CCI did not show any restraint in penalising large corporations as was seen in the case of the beer industry where 3 beer companies and the All India Brewers’ Association (“ Association ”) was imposed with a cumulative penalty of approximately INR 871 crore (USD 116 million approx.) for collusion in relation to the supply and sale of beer in India. [3] Interestingly, the case was started based on a whistle-blower’s application. The penalty order has been stayed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“ NCLAT ”) on appeal. [4]

In the paper manufacturing industry, despite noting the economic downturn caused by pandemic, a symbolic penalty of INR 5 lakh was imposed on each party for cartelisation in fixing prices of writing and printing paper. [5] It is nevertheless important to note that the lenient approach might only be an exception that the CCI is making in the wake of the pandemic or other mitigating factors, having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case.

Moreover, waiver of penalty is not a right of parties but discretion of the CCI. This is bolstered by the CCI penalising parties, albeit nominally for bid rigging in tenders floated by GAIL (India) Limited, despite their deplorable condition [6]

The CCI also ordered the associations of Tamil and Telugu film producers to cease and desist from limiting and controlling the production, supply and provision of services etc. in Tamil cinema by way of strike and boycott calls. [7] However, no penalty was imposed having regard to the nature and duration of the conduct.

Vertical restraints

In the second case of Resale Price Maintenance (“ RPM ”) [8] violation in India, Maruti Suzuki India Limited was penalised a hefty amount of INR 200 Crore by the CCI, for setting a minimum price at which their cars could be sold. [9] . The penalty-order, however, has been stayed by the NCLAT. [10] In automobile sector, the CCI previously directed an investigation against Tata Motors Ltd. for coercing dealers to stock vehicles as directed and restricting them from indulging in any other business, thereby abusing its dominance in the market for manufacture and sale of commercial vehicles in India. [11] Recently, the CCI also rejected a request for granting an interim relief in this case. [12]

Recently, the CCI has also directed an investigation in the cinema industry for vertical restraints such as exclusive supply, refusal to deal and tie-in arrangements by Digital Cinema Equipment (“ DCE ”) suppliers. [13]

Abuse of dominance across sectors

In the technology sector, the CCI is investigating Google for anti-competitive vertical agreements and abuse of its dominance by imposing restrictive obligations in its contracts with smart TV and mobile original equipment manufacturers, in the market for licensable smart television device operating system in India. [14]

Investigation has also been directed against WhatsApp [15] for exploitative and exclusionary conduct in garb of policy update, and Apple for abuse of dominance in the market for app stores for iOS in India. [16]

The CCI has also launched investigations into the sports sector for abuse of dominance by various apex sports associations.

The investigations pertain to the markets for organization of baseball matches [17] and table tennis matches [18] . Both the cases involved the apex associations restricting their respective players from participating in tournaments organized by unrecognized bodies. The CCI in the baseball case has also issued an interim order restricting the apex association from threatening players or issuing directions to its affiliated associations in order to dissuade players from taking part in events organised by unrecognized bodies. [19] It is notable that the CCI which has until 2021 issued interim orders only four times [20] , issued 3 interim orders in 2021 itself. [21]

The CCI also found abuse of dominance by Grasim Industries Limited in the market for supply of viscose staple fibre to spinners in India and ordered it to cease and desist from charging discriminatory prices to its customers, denying market access and imposing supplementary obligations upon its customers. [22] However, no penalty was imposed since a penalty worth INR 301.61 crores, for similar conduct in a similar period had already been imposed in a previous order.

As noted above, the year 2021 was extremely busy for the competition regulator in India and was marked by a large number of investigations, penalty orders, interim orders and dawn raids etc. A major shift in the CCI’s enforcement trend was witnessed in relation to interim measures.

An increased understanding of market realities and practical difficulties, like long gap between the initiation of an investigation and passing of the final order, probably led to CCI’s increased use of interim measures for aggrieved parties.

During 2021, the CCI also conducted market studies in the telecom [23] and the pharmaceutical sectors [24] .

A discussion paper on blockchain technology and competition was also released pre-empting the potential concerns that may arise in this novel frontier. [25]

The market studies and the discussion paper are welcome moves as it shows the commitment of the CCI towards understanding new-age markets.

The regulatory vigour as noted above coupled with legislative changes like the three amendments to various regulations of CCI this year [26] and the expected changes to the Act with the Draft Competition Amendment Bill, 2020 [27] , potentially the first amendment to the Act since its coming into force in 2009, are welcome signs of India transforming into a mature competition law jurisdiction.

Filed under

• Competition & Antitrust
• Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys
• Coronavirus

Popular articles from this firm

Occupational safety, health and working conditions code, 2020 - an overview *, fate of indirect transfer tax post tiger global judgment - will it add hurdles for mnes *, direct tax vivad se vishwas scheme, 2024 *, laws related to economic offences - a primer *, foreign companies’ obligation to file tax return in india *.

Professional development

Will Drafting - How to Avoid Expensive Mistakes - Learn Live

Family Procedure Rules - Key Principles & Updates - Learn Live

Tax Advantaged Employee Share Plans - Handling Maturities & Other Post-Implementation Events - Learn Live

Rent Review in Commercial Leases - Drafting Tips & Traps - Learn Live

A Practical Guide to Winding Up Procedure - A Company’s Inability to Pay - Learn Live

Related practical resources PRO

• How-to guide How-to guide: How to assess competition law risks in an agency agreement (UK) Recently updated
• How-to guide How-to guide: How to identify and prioritise competition law risk in your organisation (non-dominant and dominant organisations) (UK) Recently updated
• Checklist Checklist: Responding to an information request from the Competition and Markets Authority (UK) Recently updated

Related research hubs

• My Shodhganga
• Receive email updates
• Edit Profile

Shodhganga : a reservoir of Indian theses @ INFLIBNET

• Shodhganga@INFLIBNET
• Amity University, Noida
• Amity Institute of Advanced Legal Studies

Items in Shodhganga are licensed under Creative Commons Licence Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).

• Apprentice Lawyer

10 Important Judgments on Competition Law by Indian Courts in 2023

2023 has been an important year in the development of competition law jurisprudence in India.

While the Competition Commission of India ( CCI ) remained inquorate for a substantial part of the year, the Supreme Court of India ( Supreme Court ), the High Courts, and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ( NCLAT ) (the appellate authority of the CCI) pronounced a number of judgments that impact the jurisdiction and functioning of the CCI, and address contentious issues within the Indian competition law framework.

These key decisions are summarised below.

1. Coal India Ltd & Anr. v. Competition Commission of India & Another (Supreme Court – June 2023) - Competition Act is applicable to State-owned monopolies.

After a ten-year legal battle between Coal India Ltd ( CIL ) and the CCI on its jurisdiction to examine the conduct of State-owned monopolies, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 ( Competition Act ) apply to CIL and similar public sector undertakings. The Supreme Court decision clarified that the Competition Act is applicable to all government companies and statutory monopolies that operate to further “common good” under the Constitution of India.

Given the Supreme Court’s decision, the CCI’s jurisdiction to investigate and take measures against statutory monopolies similar to CIL in abuse of dominance cases has been confirmed.

2. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v. Competition Commission of India & Another (Delhi High Court – July 2023) – Patents Act, 1970 is a code in itself and prevails over the provisions of the Competition Act

A division bench of the Delhi High Court held that disputes relating to allegations of anticompetitive conduct in the licensing of patents cannot be examined under the Competition Act and should be examined under the Patents Act, 1970.

This decision has effectively barred the jurisdiction of the CCI in examining disputes relating to the licensing of patents. Previously, a licensee could approach the CCI impugning terms and conditions in licensing agreements which potentially violated the provisions of the Competition Act. Now, a licensee will have to approach the Controller of Patents on all issues relating to alleged unreasonable conditions in patent license agreements, including allegations of anticompetitive conduct.

The CCI has appealed the Delhi High Court’s decision before the Supreme Court. However, the appeal is yet to be admitted.

3. Institute of Chartered Accounts of India v. Competition Commission of India & Others (Delhi High Court – June 2023) – The CCI does not have the jurisdiction to examine decisions of other statutory regulators

The Delhi High Court held that the CCI does not have jurisdiction to examine the decisions of other statutory regulators taken by them in exercise of their regulatory functions, with no interface with trade or commerce. The Delhi High Court also held that the Competition Act does not contemplate the CCI acting as an appellate court or a grievance redressal forum against decisions of statutory bodies, which are taken in exercise of their statutory powers.

The Delhi High Court decision creates an important exception for statutory regulators / bodies from the CCI’s scrutiny, even if their decisions may create anticompetitive effects.

No appeal has been filed against this decision as on the date of writing this article.

4. Google India Pvt. Ltd v. Matrimony.com Ltd (Madras High Court – August 2023) – Civil Courts’ jurisdiction is ousted by the Competition Act in abuse of dominance cases

Several parties approached the Madras High Court under its civil jurisdiction seeking a declaration that the terms and conditions imposed by a dominant entity in a commercial agreement were illegal and unenforceable. Rejecting the plaint, the Madras High Court held that Section 61 of the Competition Act expressly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts from entertaining suits based on the cause of action relating to the abuse of a dominant position by an enterprise. The Madras High Court further held that even though civil courts are empowered to go into the question of unconscionable nature of agreements entered between parties of unequal bargaining power under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 ( ICA ) the Competition Act, being a special law, will prevail over the ICA.

This decision is significant as it upholds the jurisdiction of the CCI to examine the conduct of dominant enterprises under Section 4 of the Competition Act.

The decision is currently pending in appeal before the division bench of the Madras High Court.

5. Alliance of Digital India Foundation v. Competition Commission of India & Others (Delhi High Court – April 2023) – Mere defect or vacancy in the constitution of the CCI does not impede its jurisdiction to adjudicate complaints or any other proceedings pending before it

The Delhi High Court held that the CCI could continue its adjudicatory process even in the absence of a coram of three members. The decision notes that a mere defect or vacancy in the constitution of the CCI would not invalidate the proceedings before it.

Prior to the pronouncement of the judgment, the CCI was unable to issue orders for a period of approximately six months due to being inquorate. In February 2023, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India allowed the CCI to invoke the “ doctrine of necessity ” to examine combinations under its merger control mandate to clear the backlog of transactions awaiting approval. However, no such direction was seemingly provided for adjudication of pending enforcement cases.

When a party approached the Delhi High Court seeking directions to the CCI to act on its complaints and provide interim relief, the Court examined various provisions of the Competition Act and noted a distinction between administrative functions (where the Court held that quorum requirements may apply) and adjudicatory functions (where the Court held that there were no strict quorum requirements prescribed under the Competition Act). The High Court also appreciated that preventing the CCI from passing adjudicatory orders would effectively bring its functioning to a standstill which would go against the spirit of the Competition Act.

This decision will ensure that the CCI continues to adjudicate enforcement cases (including urgent applications for interim relief) even if it is inquorate in the future, making sure that adjudication of cases is not halted due to a mere vacancy in the CCI’s coram .

This decision was appealed before the division bench of the Delhi High Court. However, the appeal was subsequently withdrawn.

6. Ultratech Cement Ltd v. Competition Commission of India & Another (Delhi High Court – December 2023) – The CCI may allow impleadment of any party with “substantial interest” and “in public interest”

The Delhi High Court ruled that the CCI has the power to implead any party to a competition proceeding at any stage provided it satisfies the two-fold test of ‘substantial interest’ and ‘public interest’ under Regulation 25 of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009. It further clarified that such an impleadment does not change the nature of proceedings as proceedings in personam but merely assists the CCI to conduct proceedings in a better and effective manner enabling it to reach an informed decision.

This is one of the first decisions where the CCI allowed the impleadment of a party after the DG had concluded its investigation in the matter. The decision also provides much needed clarity regarding the test for impleadment to matters pending before the CCI for third parties who are interested in the outcome of the proceeding.

The decision is currently pending in appeal before a division bench of the Delhi High Court.

7. Google LLC & Anr v Competition Commission of India & Others (NCLAT – March 2023) – The CCI must conduct an “effects analysis” for proving abuse of dominance under the Competition Act

The NCLAT held that the CCI must conduct an “ effects analysis ” to prove that an entity has abused its dominant position in violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act. The test to be employed while conducting an “ effects analysis ” is to show whether the abusive conduct in question is anticompetitive. Notably, the NCLAT also held that the CCI cannot impose a behavioural remedy on a dominant enterprise unless there is a specific finding of abuse of dominance in relation to such conduct.

The NCLAT’s decision is significant because the wording of Section 4 of the Competition Act does not expressly require the CCI to consider the anticompetitive effects of an impugned conduct to arrive at a finding of infringement. However, in contrast, the legislature has provided for such a stipulation when the CCI examines anticompetitive agreements under Section 3 of the Competition Act.

The NCLAT’s decision marks an important shift in Indian competition law jurisprudence where previously, the CCI has found dominant entities to violate Section 4 of the Competition Act, irrespective of whether their conduct led to an anticompetitive effect in the market. There have also been instances of the CCI imposing positive behavioural remedies on dominant entities, without finding a specific finding of abuse in relation to such conduct.

Given the NCLAT’s decision, the CCI will have to conduct a thorough examination of the anticompetitive effects of a dominant entity’s conduct, if any, to support a finding of infringement and prior to imposing any behavioural remedies on such entity in ongoing and future cases.  

The NCLAT’s decision is currently pending in appeal before the Supreme Court. However, no stay has been granted on the operation of the decision.  

8. Consumer Unity & Trust Society v. Competition Commission of India & Others (NCLAT – August 2023) –Transactions exempt from merger review cannot be examined under the provisions concerning anticompetitive agreements or abuse of dominance

The NCLAT clarified that the provisions relating to anticompetitive agreements or abuse of dominance cannot be invoked to investigate a transaction that is exempt from notification under the merger control provisions of the Competition Act.

The decision provides clarity between the difference in the legal frameworks for horizontal agreements and mergers under the Competition Act (and how they operate in completely different fields). It further clarifies that while a merger between entities (which is exempt from notification to the CCI) cannot be examined by the CCI ex-ante under Section 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, the parties’ conduct can be scrutinised under these provisions ex-post (after the fact) if there is some evidence of violation of the Competition Act.

This decision will ensure that mergers which are otherwise exempt from notification to the CCI are not halted by frivolous complaints and interim relief applications filed before the CCI alleging violations of Section 3 or 4 of the Competition Act.  

No appeal has been filed against this decision as on the date of writing this article. 

9. The U.P. Glass Manufacturers Syndicate v. Competition Commission of India & Others (NCLAT - July 2023) – Third-parties do not always have a right to submit comments against combinations pending approval before the CCI

The NCLAT held that third-parties are not entitled to submit comments / submissions against or in favour of combinations pending approval before the CCI, unless the CCI invites such comments or information. The NCLAT clarified that the public’s right of participation arises only when the CCI directs the parties to the combination to publish the details of the combination to bring the combination to the knowledge of the public and persons affected or likely to be affected.

The NCLAT’s decision clarified that combination orders cannot be challenged by third-parties on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice for failing to consider suggestions / objections by the public, unless the CCI has specifically directed the parties to publish the details of the combination and sought comments from the public.

10. Balrampur Chini Mills Limited v. Competition Commission of India & Others (NCLAT – October 2023) – One who hears should decide  

The NCLAT held that the composition of CCI members who hear final arguments in a matter must be part of the decision making and pronouncement of the final judgment. The appellant submitted that the CCI’s order was patently illegal since it was pronounced by a composition of three CCI members, whereas the final arguments were heard by a composition of six CCI members. The NCLAT broadly accepted the argument, and set aside the CCI’s order on the grounds that: (a) it was pronounced after an inordinate delay of thirteen months after the matter was heard; and (b) due to this inordinate delay, some of the members that heard final arguments in the matter had left office before the final order could be pronounced.

This decision is significant considering that several cases during the inception years of the CCI were heard by a composition of different members, some of which are still pending in appeal.

About the authors: Rohan Arora is a Partner and Shivek Sahai Endlaw is an Associate in the Competition Law Practice at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, New Delhi.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are personal. They do not purport or reflect the opinions or views of SAM & Co or its members.

10 Important Judgments on Competition Law by Indian Courts in 2023 #Columns #CompetitionLaw #Courts https://t.co/YNVdhUq1ZU — Bar & Bench (@barandbench) January 10, 2024

Competition Law Research Paper Topics

This page presents a comprehensive exploration of competition law research paper topics , designed to assist law students in their pursuit of academic excellence. As competition law continues to play a critical role in regulating market dynamics, students often face the challenge of choosing compelling research topics that reflect the evolving complexities of this field. Here, we highlight the diverse range of competition law research paper topics covered in this page, encompassing anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant market position, mergers and acquisitions, intellectual property issues, digital markets, international antitrust enforcement, consumer protection, public policy implications, and emerging issues in the digital era. Through this curated list of topics, students will gain insights into the multifaceted dimensions of competition law, fostering critical thinking and the ability to address real-world challenges in an ever-changing legal landscape. Whether investigating the intersection of competition law and technology or exploring the impact of global trade on market competition, this page aims to empower students with an array of research paper ideas to embark on their scholarly endeavors in competition law.

100 Competition Law Research Paper Topics

Competition law is a dynamic and multifaceted field that addresses various issues related to market competition, monopolies, consumer welfare, and economic efficiency. As law students delve into this intricate domain, they often encounter the challenge of selecting compelling research paper topics that reflect the evolving complexities of competition law. To aid students in their academic journey, we present a comprehensive list of competition law research paper topics, carefully curated and divided into ten categories, each offering unique insights into the realm of market regulation and antitrust enforcement.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Anti-competitive Agreements:

• The Role of Cartels in Market Manipulation: Case Studies and Impact on Consumers
• Horizontal vs. Vertical Agreements: Analyzing the Distinctions and Legal Implications
• Price Fixing and Collusion: Assessing the Challenges of Detecting and Prosecuting Anti-competitive Conduct
• Leniency Programs: Evaluating the Effectiveness in Combating Cartels and Encouraging Cooperation
• Trade Associations and Competition Law: Balancing Industry Cooperation and Compliance with Antitrust Regulations
• Technology Cartels and the Digital Age: Investigating Anti-competitive Practices in Tech Markets
• Intellectual Property and Competition: Antitrust Implications of Patent Pools and Cross-Licensing Agreements
• Compliance Mechanisms for Agreements: Promoting Ethical Business Practices and Preventing Collusion
• Bundling and Tying Arrangements: Analyzing the Impact on Market Entry and Consumer Choice
• Antitrust Enforcement in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Addressing Market Distortions and Access to Medicine.

Abuse of Dominant Market Position:

• Monopolization and Market Power: Analyzing the Criteria for Identifying Dominant Firms
• Predatory Pricing and Market Entry Barriers: Evaluating the Impact on Competitors and Consumers
• Exclusionary Practices by Tech Giants: The Intersection of Dominance and Digital Markets
• Leveraging Dominant Position to Enter Adjacent Markets: Examining the Antitrust Implications
• Essential Facilities Doctrine: Balancing Market Dominance and Access to Key Infrastructure
• Market Definition and Dominant Market Shares: Methodological Challenges in Identifying Dominant Firms
• Refusal to Deal and Essential Inputs: Assessing the Role of Dominant Entities in Supply Chains
• Intellectual Property and Dominant Firms: Exploring the Intersection of Competition Law and Patents
• Abusive Discrimination and Market Access: Analyzing the Legal Framework and Enforcement Challenges
• Monopoly Regulation in Developing Economies: Promoting Fair Competition and Economic Growth.

Mergers and Acquisitions:

• Merger Control Thresholds: The Balance between Market Concentration and Facilitating Business Transactions
• Failing Firm Defense: Evaluating the Criteria for Allowing Mergers in Distressed Companies
• Killer Acquisitions: Assessing the Impact of Acquiring Potential Competitors on Innovation
• Conglomerate Mergers and Market Power: The Challenges of Analyzing Diversified Entities
• Gun-Jumping and Pre-merger Coordination: The Role of Antitrust Agencies in Preventing Premature Actions
• Cross-Border Mergers: Analyzing the Challenges of Harmonizing Antitrust Enforcement in Global Transactions
• Market Definition in Merger Analysis: The Significance of Product and Geographic Market Definition
• Remedies in Merger Control: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Divestitures and Behavioral Conditions
• Merger Waves and Economic Cycles: Examining the Relationship between M&A Activities and Market Performance
• Merger Notification Procedures: Streamlining the Review Process and Ensuring Effective Decision-Making.

Intellectual Property and Competition Law:

• Standard-Essential Patents and FRAND Commitments: Balancing Innovation Incentives and Access to Essential Technologies
• Patent Thickets and Competition: Addressing Patent Pools and Overlapping Rights
• Intellectual Property Rights and Market Power: Antitrust Scrutiny of Dominant Firms with Strong IP Portfolios
• Technology Transfer Agreements and Antitrust Compliance: Evaluating Licensing Practices and Competition
• Trademarks and Market Distinctiveness: Analyzing the Antitrust Implications of Branding Strategies
• Copyright Licensing and Competition: The Interface between Copyright and Market Competition
• Big Data and Antitrust: The Impact of Data Dominance on Market Concentration and Consumer Choice
• Digital Rights Management and Competition Law: Striking a Balance between Copyright Protection and Market Access
• Antitrust Enforcement in the Digital Media Industry: Implications for Content Creators and Distribution Platforms
• Innovation and Market Dominance: The Interaction between Patent Protection and Competition Law.

Competition Law and Digital Markets:

• Big Tech and Platform Dominance: Investigating the Role of Technology Giants in Shaping Digital Markets
• Data Privacy and Antitrust: Analyzing the Relationship between Consumer Data and Market Power
• Online Platforms and Self-Preferencing: The Legal Boundaries of Fair Competition in E-Commerce
• Algorithmic Collusion: Detecting and Addressing Collusive Behavior in Automated Systems
• Digital Advertising and Competition: The Intersection of Targeted Ads and Market Concentration
• The Sharing Economy and Antitrust Regulation: The Challenges of Promoting Competition in Peer-to-Peer Platforms
• Internet Intermediaries and Market Fairness: Examining the Role of Online Intermediaries in Facilitating Market Access
• Digital Market Definition and Geographic Boundaries: The Challenges in Defining Online Markets
• Data Ownership and Market Power: The Antitrust Implications of Data Dominance in the Digital Era
• E-Commerce Platforms and Exclusionary Practices: Analyzing Anti-competitive Behavior in Online Markets.

International Antitrust Enforcement:

• Extraterritorial Application of Competition Law: The Legal Challenges and Global Cooperation Efforts
• Cross-Border Cartels: Investigating the Challenges of Multi-Jurisdictional Prosecution and Enforcement
• Regional Competition Agreements: Assessing the Role of Regional Bodies in Promoting Cross-Border Competition
• Merger Control in a Globalized Economy: Harmonization and Divergence of Merger Review Procedures
• Antitrust in the Digital Silk Road: The Impact of China’s Belt and Road Initiative on Global Markets
• International Trade and Market Access: Analyzing the Link between Antitrust and Trade Policies
• Antitrust and Developing Economies: Tailoring Enforcement to Local Contexts and Economic Development
• Antitrust Compliance in Cross-Border Mergers: Navigating the Legal Landscape of International Transactions
• Cross-Border Antitrust Investigations: Examining the Challenges of Collecting and Sharing Evidence
• Competition Advocacy in International Forums: Promoting Global Cooperation and Convergence.

Consumer Protection and Competition Law:

• Misleading Advertising and Consumer Deception: The Intersection of Consumer Rights and Market Competition
• Price Discrimination and Consumer Welfare: Analyzing the Impact on Vulnerable Populations
• Online Consumer Rights in Digital Markets: Ensuring Fair Practices and Redress Mechanisms
• Competition Law and Healthcare: Addressing Market Concentration and Access to Medicine
• Financial Services and Market Regulation: Consumer Protection in the Banking Sector
• Consumer Data and Privacy in the Digital Age: The Intersection of Consumer Protection and Data Dominance
• Unfair Competition Practices: Analyzing the Role of Unfair Competition in Restraining Market Access and Consumer Choice
• Product Safety and Market Competition: Balancing Innovation and Consumer Welfare
• Consumer Empowerment and Market Information: The Impact of Market Transparency on Consumer Decision-Making
• Competition Law Remedies for Consumer Harm: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Compensation Mechanisms.

Public Policy and Competition Law:

• Antitrust and Innovation: The Interplay between Market Competition and Technological Advancements
• Competition Policy and Economic Development: The Role of Antitrust in Fostering Economic Growth
• Political Influence and Market Concentration: Analyzing the Impact of Lobbying on Antitrust Regulation
• Market Regulation in Times of Crisis: Addressing Competition Challenges during Economic Downturns
• National Security and Competition Law: Balancing National Interests and Open Markets
• Market Power and Income Inequality: The Socioeconomic Implications of Market Concentration
• Technology Transfer and National Interest: Assessing the Role of Competition Law in Safeguarding Innovation
• Corporate Social Responsibility and Market Dominance: Examining Ethical Business Practices and Market Influence
• Environmental Sustainability and Competition Law: The Relationship between Competition and Green Business Practices
• Digital Sovereignty and Market Control: Navigating the Challenges of Global Technology Regulation.

Emerging Issues in the Digital Era:

• Artificial Intelligence and Antitrust: The Challenges of Addressing Algorithmic Collusion
• Blockchain Technology and Market Competition: The Potential of Decentralized Markets
• Data Monopolies and Market Distortion: Antitrust Implications in Data-Driven Economies
• Internet of Things and Market Dominance: The Intersection of Connected Devices and Competition Law
• Virtual Markets and Market Power: Analyzing the Antitrust Impact of Virtual Goods and Services
• Privacy Regulation and Competition Law: The Balancing Act between Data Protection and Market Competition
• Digital Disinformation and Competition Law: Addressing Misinformation and Consumer Manipulation
• Competition Law Enforcement in the Gig Economy: The Challenges of Regulating Flexible Work Arrangements
• Smart Cities and Antitrust: The Impact of Technological Urbanization on Market Concentration
• Cybersecurity and Market Competition: The Role of Antitrust in Protecting Against Cyber Threats.

Case Studies in Competition Law:

• Microsoft Antitrust Case: Analyzing the Legacy of the U.S. v. Microsoft Corp. Case
• Google Antitrust Cases: Assessing the EU’s Multiple Investigations into Google’s Market Dominance
• Apple vs. Epic Games: The Antitrust Battle over App Store Policies and Market Access
• Qualcomm vs. FTC: The Antitrust Litigation over Qualcomm’s Licensing Practices
• Intel Antitrust Case: Examining the European Commission’s Decision on Intel’s Market Dominance
• Amazon and Antitrust: Investigating Amazon’s Role as a Dominant E-Commerce Platform
• Facebook and Market Dominance: The Antitrust Scrutiny of Social Media Platforms
• Standard Oil and the Origins of Antitrust: A Historical Perspective on Competition Regulation
• Uber and Antitrust: Addressing the Competition Challenges in the Ride-Hailing Industry
• Visa and Mastercard Antitrust Cases: Analyzing the Legal Battle over Credit Card Network Fees.

In conclusion, this comprehensive list of competition law research paper topics offers a diverse and extensive range of areas for exploration in the dynamic field of antitrust regulation and market competition. From examining the implications of anti-competitive agreements to navigating the challenges of regulating digital markets, students will find ample opportunities to delve into complex legal issues and contribute to the ongoing evolution of competition law. By exploring these thought-provoking topics, students can enhance their critical thinking skills, develop a deeper understanding of legal complexities, and contribute to the advancement of competition law jurisprudence. This carefully curated collection aims to empower law students in their academic pursuits and inspire them to undertake impactful research in the realm of competition law.

Competition Law: Exploring the Range of Research Paper Topics

Competition law, also known as antitrust law in some jurisdictions, is a crucial area of legal study that aims to promote fair competition and prevent anti-competitive practices in the marketplace. It plays a vital role in maintaining a level playing field for businesses, safeguarding consumer interests, and fostering economic efficiency. As students of law venture into the realm of competition law, they are presented with a vast and ever-evolving landscape of legal issues to explore and analyze. This section delves into the multifaceted world of competition law research paper topics, highlighting key areas of interest and offering valuable insights to inspire law students in their academic pursuits.

The Evolution of Competition Law

To begin our exploration, it is essential to understand the historical development of competition law. Students can investigate the origins of antitrust regulation, examining landmark cases and legislative milestones that have shaped the field over time. They can explore how competition law has evolved to adapt to new economic challenges and technological advancements, such as the impact of globalization and the digital era on market competition.

Theoretical Perspectives in Competition Law

Competition law draws upon various economic theories to justify its existence and guide its application. Students can delve into different theoretical perspectives, such as the Chicago School of thought, the Harvard School, and the Post-Chicago School, and critically analyze their implications for antitrust policy and enforcement. This area of research allows students to explore the tensions between economic efficiency and consumer welfare, as well as the role of competition authorities in balancing competing objectives.

Comparative Analysis of Competition Laws

Conducting a comparative study of competition laws across different jurisdictions provides an enriching research opportunity. Students can compare and contrast the legal frameworks, enforcement approaches, and policy objectives of various countries, shedding light on the diversity of approaches to competition regulation and identifying potential areas of harmonization or cooperation in the global context.

Market Definition and Dominance Assessment

Defining relevant markets and assessing market dominance are critical steps in competition law analysis. Research papers in this area can explore the methodologies used by competition authorities to define markets, measure market power, and identify dominant firms. Students can examine the challenges of market definition in emerging sectors, such as digital markets and technology-driven industries.

Anti-competitive Agreements

The prohibition of anti-competitive agreements lies at the core of competition law. Students can investigate the different types of agreements, such as cartels, price-fixing arrangements, and bid-rigging, and explore the legal and economic consequences of such collusive practices. Research papers may delve into leniency programs, the role of whistleblowers, and the use of technology in detecting and prosecuting anti-competitive agreements.

Abuse of Dominant Market Position

Analyzing cases of market dominance and abuse is an area of significant interest in competition law research. Students can examine the factors that contribute to market power, such as barriers to entry, network effects, and economies of scale, and explore how dominant firms may engage in exclusionary conduct to maintain or strengthen their position in the market. This research can include the examination of cases involving monopolization, predatory pricing, and refusal to deal.

Merger Control and Consolidation

Mergers and acquisitions have the potential to impact market competition significantly. Research papers in this area can focus on the effectiveness of merger control regulations in preventing anti-competitive consolidation, the role of economic analysis in merger reviews, and the challenges of regulating cross-border mergers. Students can explore the factors considered by competition authorities when evaluating the competitive effects of mergers and the design of remedies to address potential anti-competitive concerns.

Competition Law Enforcement in the Digital Age

As the world becomes increasingly digitalized, competition law faces new challenges in addressing the unique issues arising in the digital marketplace. Students can investigate the role of competition law in regulating online platforms, data-driven markets, and the use of algorithms. They may examine the complexities of applying traditional competition principles to the digital economy and consider the role of big data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning in competition enforcement.

Sector-Specific Competition Law

Competition law is often tailored to address specific industries or sectors. Students can explore sector-specific competition regulations, such as competition law in the healthcare industry, telecommunications, financial services, or energy markets. This research allows for an in-depth examination of the particular challenges and policy objectives that arise in different sectors and how competition law can be adapted to address sector-specific issues.

Competition Policy and Public Interest Considerations

Competition law enforcement is not only about promoting efficiency and consumer welfare but also involves considerations of public interest and broader societal objectives. Students can delve into the interface between competition law and public policy, examining cases where competition enforcement has been influenced by non-economic concerns, such as environmental protection, access to essential services, or cultural preservation.

The realm of competition law research offers a vast landscape of compelling topics that reflect the intricacies of market regulation, antitrust enforcement, and consumer protection. As law students engage in exploring these research paper topics, they embark on a journey to understand the complexities and significance of competition law in shaping the competitive dynamics of modern economies. Through their scholarly pursuits, students not only contribute to the academic discourse but also play a crucial role in advancing the field of competition law and its impact on society and economic welfare.

How to Choose Competition Law Research Paper Topics

Selecting a research paper topic is a crucial step in the academic journey of law students. The field of competition law offers a diverse range of fascinating and relevant issues for exploration, making the process of choosing the right research topic both exciting and challenging. This section provides valuable insights and practical tips to help students navigate the process of selecting compelling and well-defined competition law research paper topics that align with their interests, expertise, and academic goals.

• Identify Your Area of Interest : Begin by identifying your area of interest within the broad scope of competition law. Are you intrigued by antitrust enforcement in the digital economy, mergers and acquisitions, or the economic implications of market dominance? By narrowing down your interests, you can focus on specific topics that resonate with your passion for the subject.
• Conduct Preliminary Research : Before finalizing your research topic, conduct preliminary research to familiarize yourself with recent developments and emerging trends in competition law. Stay updated with landmark cases, policy changes, and academic publications in the field. This background research will help you identify gaps in the existing literature and potential areas for further exploration.
• Define Your Research Objectives : Clearly define your research objectives and the specific questions you aim to answer in your paper. Are you seeking to analyze the effectiveness of certain competition law regulations, explore the impact of market consolidation, or evaluate the role of competition enforcement in specific industries? Having well-defined research objectives will guide your selection of a focused and relevant topic.
• Analyze the Legal Framework : Competition law operates within a legal framework that varies across jurisdictions. If you are interested in conducting a comparative analysis, choose a topic that allows for a meaningful comparison of competition laws in different countries. Understanding the legal context is essential for framing your research question and methodology.
• Consider Practical Implications : Assess the practical implications of your chosen research topic. How does your research contribute to the ongoing discourse on competition law? Is there potential for your findings to inform competition policy or impact the enforcement practices of competition authorities? Topics with practical significance can add value to your research and demonstrate its relevance in the real world.
• Consult with Faculty and Peers : Engage in discussions with your faculty members and peers to seek their input and feedback on potential research topics. Collaborating with others can provide new perspectives, help refine your ideas, and ensure that your research aligns with academic standards and expectations.
• Access to Data and Resources : Consider the availability of data and resources relevant to your research topic. Access to comprehensive data and credible sources can significantly enhance the quality and depth of your research. Ensure that you have access to the necessary legal texts, court decisions, economic data, and academic literature to support your analysis.
• Timeliness and Relevance : Choose a research topic that is timely and relevant to the current state of competition law. Topics that address emerging issues, recent court decisions, or changes in regulatory approaches can attract greater interest from readers and contribute to ongoing debates in the field.
• Originality and Contribution : Strive for originality in your research topic and aim to make a unique contribution to the field of competition law. Avoid topics that have been extensively covered or lack novelty. Consider how your research can fill gaps in existing literature or offer fresh perspectives on well-known issues.
• Stay Open to Exploration : Finally, remain open to exploring new ideas and adjusting your research focus as you delve deeper into the literature. As you progress in your research journey, new insights may lead you to refine your research question or explore related areas that enrich your paper.

Selecting the right competition law research paper topic is a critical step in producing a compelling and impactful academic work. By identifying your interests, conducting thorough research, defining your objectives, and considering practical implications, you can narrow down your choices and choose a topic that aligns with your academic goals and contributes meaningfully to the field of competition law. Remember to seek guidance from faculty and peers, access credible resources, and stay open to exploration as you embark on your research journey.

How to Write a Competition Law Research Paper

Writing a competition law research paper requires a systematic approach that combines legal analysis, economic insights, and critical thinking. As law students delve into the complexities of competition law, they must effectively communicate their findings and arguments in a well-structured and coherent manner. This section provides valuable guidance on how to write a compelling competition law research paper, from planning and conducting research to structuring the paper and presenting the analysis effectively.

• Define Your Research Question : At the outset, clearly define your research question or thesis statement. Your research question should be specific, focused, and aligned with the objectives of your study. It serves as the guiding compass throughout the writing process and ensures that your paper remains cohesive and on track.
• Conduct Thorough Research : Competition law research papers require a comprehensive examination of legal texts, court decisions, academic literature, and economic data. Conduct thorough research using authoritative sources to gather relevant information, legal precedents, and empirical evidence to support your arguments.
• Create an Outline : Before diving into writing, create a detailed outline that outlines the structure of your paper. An outline helps organize your thoughts, provides a logical flow to your arguments, and ensures that you cover all essential aspects of your research.
• Introduction : The introduction should provide context for your research topic, present the research question, and outline the scope and objectives of your paper. Engage your readers with a compelling opening and highlight the significance of your research in the context of competition law.
• Literature Review : Conduct a thorough literature review to situate your research within the existing body of scholarship on competition law. Identify key theories, legal principles, and economic concepts that inform your research and highlight any gaps in the literature that your paper aims to address.
• Legal Analysis : Present a detailed legal analysis of the relevant competition law principles, statutes, and court decisions that are central to your research question. Analyze how these legal frameworks apply to the specific issues or cases you are examining. Use clear and precise legal language while supporting your analysis with authoritative sources.
• Economic Analysis : If your research involves economic aspects, provide an economic analysis that complements your legal analysis. Integrate economic concepts, such as market power, consumer welfare, and efficiency, into your arguments. Use empirical data, economic models, and economic theory to support your findings.
• Case Studies : Consider incorporating case studies or real-world examples to illustrate your arguments and demonstrate how competition law principles are applied in practice. Case studies provide valuable insights and strengthen the practical relevance of your research.
• Antitrust Policy Implications : Discuss the policy implications of your research findings. Consider how your analysis informs antitrust policy, enforcement practices, and potential legislative reforms. Offer practical recommendations for policymakers and competition authorities based on your research.
• Conclusion : In the conclusion, restate your research question and summarize the main findings of your paper. Emphasize the significance of your research and its contribution to the field of competition law. Discuss any limitations of your study and propose areas for further research.
• Citations and References : Ensure that you use proper citations and references throughout your paper to acknowledge the sources of your information and ideas. Follow the appropriate citation style, such as APA, MLA, or Chicago, as required by your academic institution.
• Review and Revise : Writing a competition law research paper is an iterative process. After completing the first draft, review your paper for clarity, coherence, and consistency. Revise your arguments, strengthen your analysis, and ensure that your paper adheres to academic standards.
• Seek Feedback : Seek feedback from professors, mentors, or peers to get valuable insights and suggestions for improvement. Feedback from others can help refine your arguments, clarify your writing, and enhance the overall quality of your research paper.

Writing a competition law research paper requires a rigorous approach that integrates legal analysis, economic insights, and scholarly research. By defining a clear research question, conducting thorough research, and structuring your paper effectively, you can craft a compelling and impactful research paper that contributes to the vibrant field of competition law. Through careful writing and presentation of your analysis, you can convey your expertise, critical thinking, and understanding of complex legal issues to your readers.

iResearchNet’s Custom Research Paper Writing Services

At iResearchNet, we understand the challenges that law students face when tasked with writing a competition law research paper. The field of competition law is dynamic and complex, requiring a deep understanding of legal principles, economic theories, and real-world applications. We recognize the importance of producing high-quality research papers that not only meet academic standards but also contribute to the advancement of competition law knowledge. To support students in their academic journey, we offer custom competition law research paper writing services that cater to their unique needs and requirements.

• Expert Degree-Holding Writers : At iResearchNet, we pride ourselves on having a team of expert writers who possess advanced degrees in law and related fields. Our writers are well-versed in competition law and have a keen understanding of legal principles and economic concepts. With their expertise, they can deliver comprehensive and well-researched papers that meet the highest academic standards.
• Custom Written Works : We believe in providing personalized solutions to our clients. Each competition law research paper is custom written based on the specific requirements and instructions provided by the student. Our writers conduct thorough research, analyze legal and economic aspects, and craft original papers that address the unique research questions and objectives of each client.
• In-Depth Research : Competition law research papers require in-depth research and analysis. Our writers have access to extensive academic databases, legal texts, court decisions, and economic data, enabling them to gather credible and relevant information for each paper. We ensure that our research papers are comprehensive, well-supported, and up-to-date.
• Custom Formatting : Academic formatting is a crucial aspect of research papers. Our writers are proficient in various citation styles, including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, and Harvard. They meticulously adhere to the specified formatting guidelines, ensuring that each paper is presented professionally and in accordance with the academic requirements.
• Top Quality : At iResearchNet, we prioritize quality above all else. Our dedicated quality assurance team reviews each research paper to ensure accuracy, coherence, and adherence to the client’s instructions. We aim to deliver research papers that demonstrate thorough analysis, critical thinking, and a deep understanding of competition law.
• Customized Solutions : We understand that each competition law research paper is unique, requiring individualized attention and focus. Our writers work closely with clients to understand their research objectives, preferences, and specific areas of interest. This collaborative approach allows us to deliver customized solutions that align with each student’s academic goals.
• Flexible Pricing : We offer competitive and transparent pricing for our custom competition law research paper writing services. Our pricing model is designed to accommodate students with varying budget constraints. We believe in providing value for money by offering high-quality research papers at affordable rates.
• Short Deadlines : We recognize that students often face tight deadlines when completing their research papers. At iResearchNet, we are equipped to handle urgent orders with short deadlines, delivering high-quality papers within as little as three hours. Our fast turnaround ensures that students can meet their submission deadlines without compromising on quality.
• Timely Delivery : We understand the importance of timely delivery for students. Our team is committed to delivering completed research papers within the agreed-upon deadlines. We value punctuality and ensure that clients receive their papers promptly, allowing them ample time for review and revision if needed.
• 24/7 Support : Our customer support team is available 24/7 to assist clients with any queries, concerns, or requests. Whether you need to track your order, communicate with your assigned writer, or seek updates on your paper’s progress, our support team is always ready to provide prompt assistance.
• Absolute Privacy : At iResearchNet, we prioritize the privacy and confidentiality of our clients. All personal information and communication are kept strictly confidential, and we do not disclose any client details to third parties. We use secure encryption technology to safeguard client data and ensure a safe and secure environment for transactions.
• Easy Order Tracking : Our user-friendly platform allows clients to easily track the progress of their orders. You can stay informed about the status of your research paper, communicate with your writer, and access completed drafts conveniently through our website.
• Money Back Guarantee : We are confident in the quality of our services, and we offer a money-back guarantee to ensure client satisfaction. If a client is not satisfied with the delivered research paper or if it does not meet the specified requirements, we provide a refund as per our money-back policy.

At iResearchNet, we are dedicated to supporting law students in their academic pursuits by offering custom competition law research paper writing services that cater to their unique needs. Our team of expert writers, commitment to quality, and personalized approach ensure that each research paper is crafted to the highest academic standards and contributes to the advancement of competition law knowledge. With our reliable and efficient services, students can confidently embark on their competition law journey, knowing that they have a trusted partner in iResearchNet.

Unleash the Potential of Your Research with iResearchNet

Are you a law student looking to excel in the field of competition law research? Do you find yourself grappling with complex legal principles and economic concepts while writing your competition law research paper? Look no further! iResearchNet is here to empower your academic journey and unleash the full potential of your competition law research.

Unleash the potential of your competition law research with iResearchNet’s custom research paper writing services. Our expert guidance, personalized approach, and commitment to quality empower you to excel in your academic pursuits. Let us be your trusted partner in navigating the complexities of competition law and crafting research papers that leave a lasting impact. Take the next step in your competition law journey with iResearchNet, and watch your academic achievements soar to new heights. Get started today and experience the difference!

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

• Interviews and Analysis
• Community News
• Conference Coverage
• Market Studies & Inquiries
• Merger Control
• Private Antitrust Litigation
• Unilateral Conduct
• Vertical Restraints
• Trending Topics
• Collective actions
• Digital markets
• Interim relief
• Legislation and guidance
• Price fixing
• Resale price maintenance
• Standalone claims
• Rating Enforcement
• Recognition
• Antitrust Academics
• 40 under 40
• Corporate Counsel
• Women in Antitrust
• Regional Reviews
• Market Reviews
• Class Actions
• Enforcer Hub
• US Litigation Navigator
• Cases & Precedents
• Enforcement Index
• Reports Centre
• Login | Register
• Subscribe Now

Indian digital competition law teeters, lawyers call for rethink

26 September 2024

The Indian government could scrap proposed legislation to regulate digital platforms following fierce pushback.

To read more

Subscribe to Global Competition Review

Register for limited access.

Register to receive our newsletter and gain limited access to subscriber content.

Subscribe to unlock unlimited access

Get news, unique commentary, expert analysis and essential resources from the Global Competition Review experts.

Already have access? Login below

Related topics.

• Competition Commission of India
• Online platforms
• Platforms & online marketplaces

Charles McConnell

Senior correspondent, Global Competition Review

Copyright © Law Business Research Company Number: 03281866 VAT: GB 160 7529 10

Unlock unlimited access to all Global Competition Review content

Caveat Lector: Content Warning

We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:

1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.

2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.

3. Assume the best intention of others.

Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines .

Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.

In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.

You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.

Our full terms and conditions apply too.

Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?