I.D. END TERM EXAMINATION, NOVEMBER 2017 B.A.LL.B. (HONS.) SEMESTER-IX Competition Law (Optional-II) Max. Marks: 60 Time Allowed: 3:00 Hrs. Note: Answer five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory. The number of marks carried by each question is indicated at the end of the question.

1. Answer the following (each answer should be in approximately 100 words): (Marks 2×10=20) a. A Company named ABC Corp. indulged into the combination but fails to give notice to the commission under sub-section of section 6 of the Competition Act 2002. Is there any liability which can be imposed on ABC Corp.? If yes, then what would be the quantum of penalty? b. Differentiate between unfair pricing and discriminatory pricing. c. Definition of 'Cartel' as provided in the definition clause of the Competition Act, 2002. d. Discuss the principle laid down in Technip SA v. SMS Holding regarding an agreement e. Single Economic Entity Doctrine f. Hub model of information sharing and its impact on competition g. Principle laid down in FTC v. Indiana Federation of Dentists, 1986 h. Objective of Robinson-Patman Act i. Procedure laid down for deemed approval of combination under the Competition Act, 2002 j. Define enterprise under the Competition Act, 2002

2. "Competition is the process of rivalry between business enterprises for customers which is a fundamental characteristic of a flexible and dynamic market economy. The Approach Paper to the Eleventh Five Year Plan recognized the need for creating a competitive environment to stimulate private investment and it emphasized the need for increased reliance on competitive markets subject to appropriate, transparent and effective regulations. India was among the first developing countries to have a competition law in the form of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969. But this Act was not automatically enforced in India but after a series of study and deliberations MRTP Act, 1969 came into existence. It was in 1991 that widespread reforms were undertaken and consequently the march from a 'Command-and-Control' economy to one based more on free market principles commenced its stride. The Indian economy witnessed a paradigm shift due to the economic reforms that were undertaken in the nineties, moving gradually from a 'command and control' economy to an economy based largely upon free market principles." Critically analyze the abovementioned paragraph and discuss in detail the evolution of Competition Law in India with all relevant committees and studies. (Marks 10) PTO

3. Fast Track Cab Pvt. Ltd. and Travel Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (the 'Informants') had filed information, under Section of the Competition Act, 2002 (the against "Campa Cab" alleging inter alia contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act. Informants are engaged in the business of providing radio taxi services in certain cities in South India under the brand names "Fast Track" and 'Manza'. Informants had alleged that "Campa Cab" had abused its dominant position by engaging in predatory pricing in the relevant market by offering heavy discounts to passengers and incentives to cab drivers, in contravention of Section 4 of the Act. Informants alleged that the fact that "Campa Cab" controlled over 50% of a highly concentrated market, demonstrated Campa Cab's dominance. The Informants also alleged that there were considerable entry barriers present which made it difficult for a new player to effectively compete. Consistent payment of high incentives along with exclusivity clauses in agreements with drivers allowed "Campa Cab" to thwart effective competition, lock-in drivers and create a wide base of customers. Additionally, the Informants alleged that presence of an extensive network of "Campa Cab" across the nation has acted as a sufficient detriment to any countervailing buying power available with consumers. It was alleged that the presence of a large network of "Campa Cab" has restricted the power of consumers to negotiate and substantially affect the service provider by shifting to a competing network. The CCI has directed the Director General to conduct a detailed investigation into the matter. Findings of the DG: The DG recognized the different business models prevailing in the radio taxi service industry i.e. asset-owned model, aggregator model and hybrid model. It also recognized that while "Campa Cab" functioned under the aggregator model, its services are functionally substitutable with those provided by other taxis operating under these different business models. Accordingly, the DG concluded that the relevant product market would be the "market for radio taxi services" and the relevant geographic market would be the city of Bengaluru. The DG compared the number of trips rides undertaken by different players in the relevant market between 2012 and 2016 to observe that while "Campa Cab" did grow at a meeker rate of 63% between January and September of 2015, Zuber's (another leading player of the market) trip size registered a growth of 1200% in the same period. It noted that the rise of Zuber as a healthy competitor defeated the argument for presence of entry barriers. The DG concluded that "Campa Cab" was not in a dominant position given these facts. Being the regulator analyze the above-mentioned facts in the light of sections 4 and and decide the matter after considering the findings of DG. (Marks 10)

4. Discuss in detail "Tie-in arrangement" under the competition Act, 2002 on the basis of classroom discussions. Also discuss the principle laid down in International Salt Co. v. US 332 US 392 (1947) and Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Tech. 504 US 451 (1992). (Marks 10)

5. The official website of World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) at http://www.wipo.int/ip-competition/en/explains the relationship of Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy as: "Intellectual property allows consumers to make choices between competing entrepreneurs, and the goods and services they sell. Therefore, IP is inherently pro-competitive as it ensures the protection of differentiated, intangible business assets. Without IP, less efficient manufacturers and service providers would try to lure clients by copying the goods and services of more efficient competitors. The latter would lose any incentive to improve or to offer new products and services. Society as a whole would lose. But IP only performs that crucial role of ensuring competition when it protects genuine differences." In the light of above statement, discuss in detail the interface between Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law. (Marks 10)

6. Discuss the establishment of the office of Director General under the Competition Act, 2002. Also discuss whether the DG is a statutory authority or not with the relevant case law. Discuss Competition Advocacy as a pillar of Indian competition regime. (Marks

7. Write a detailed note on the following:- (Marks a. Order of commission under section 31 of the Competition Act, 2002. b. Extraterritorial Application of the Competition Act, 2002.