The document provides an overview of India's regulation of combinations (mergers and acquisitions) from early stages of planned economic development to the present status under the Competition Act, 2002. It traces the transition from extensive government controls to economic liberalization since 1991. The Competition Commission of India was established in 2003 to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote fair competition, protect consumer interests and ensure freedom of trade. Notifiable combinations above certain asset/turnover thresholds require suspension approval from CCI which assesses the combination based on factors like impact on competition and consumer welfare.
The document provides a historical overview of India's economic policy and regulations regarding competition from the early 1950s to the present. It traces the transition from a command economy with extensive public sector control and regulations to a more liberalized market-oriented economy since 1991. Key reforms have included reducing licensing requirements, opening sectors to private competition, and abolishing price controls. This led to the enactment of the Competition Act of 2002 and establishment of the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to regulate combinations, dominant positions, and anticompetitive agreements. The CCI notifies and reviews mergers and acquisitions based on thresholds and assesses the impact on competition in the relevant market.
The document discusses the progression from the MRTP Act to the Competition Act in India. It provides definitions for key terms related to monopolistic trade practices, restrictive trade practices, unfair trade practices, and combinations. It outlines the objectives of the Competition Act to eliminate anti-competitive practices and protect consumer interests. The Competition Commission of India was established to enforce the Competition Act and assumes the role of competition advocacy.
This document provides an overview of competition policy and law in India. It discusses the early stages of India's planned economic development and transition to economic reforms since 1991. This led to the enactment of the Competition Act of 2002 and establishment of the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to prevent anti-competitive practices. The CCI regulates combinations (mergers and acquisitions) by requiring compulsory notification above certain thresholds. Combinations are assessed based on their impact on competition and orders passed for approval or modification. Relevant provisions and procedures related to combination regulation aim to balance effective competition with business certainty.
The document provides an overview of the procedures for investigating combinations (mergers and acquisitions) by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It discusses key aspects of the regulatory framework including relevant sections of the Competition Act that establish thresholds and notification requirements for combinations. It also describes CCI's process for reviewing combinations, considering various factors to determine if the combination causes an appreciable adverse effect on competition. The document highlights challenges in enforcing competition laws for combinations and compares CCI's role to predicting outcomes like an astrologer.
The document outlines a presentation by Kalpeshkumar L. Gupta on regulation of combinations under the Competition Act 2002 in India. The presentation covers an introduction to the Competition Commission of India (CCI), regulations around combinations, recent CCI orders on combinations, and concludes with noting the smooth approval procedure of CCI in its first year of regulating combinations. It also includes two examples of CCI approving major acquisitions by Aditya Birla Group and News Corporation.
The document outlines the presentation given by Kalpeshkumar L. Gupta on the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It provides definitions of key terms related to competition law like cartel and discusses provisions of the Competition Act of 2002 regarding anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and combinations. It also summarizes the regulatory framework around combinations and filing requirements to notify CCI of proposed mergers, acquisitions and other deals.
A detailed presentation on the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 ,in so far as it relates to the anti-competitive agreements and cartels during a seminar on competition policy and law in Kerala. This was a part of advocacy function of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
This document summarizes key aspects of competition law in India related to the regulation of combinations or mergers and acquisitions. It outlines the thresholds and criteria for mandatory pre-notification of combinations, as well as the review process and factors considered in assessing potential anti-competitive effects. It also compares India's regulations with international best practices and jurisdictions. Penalties for non-compliance with the regulatory framework are also summarized.
The document provides a historical overview of India's economic policy and regulations regarding competition from the early 1950s to the present. It traces the transition from a command economy with extensive public sector control and regulations to a more liberalized market-oriented economy since 1991. Key reforms have included reducing licensing requirements, opening sectors to private competition, and abolishing price controls. This led to the enactment of the Competition Act of 2002 and establishment of the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to regulate combinations, dominant positions, and anticompetitive agreements. The CCI notifies and reviews mergers and acquisitions based on thresholds and assesses the impact on competition in the relevant market.
The document discusses the progression from the MRTP Act to the Competition Act in India. It provides definitions for key terms related to monopolistic trade practices, restrictive trade practices, unfair trade practices, and combinations. It outlines the objectives of the Competition Act to eliminate anti-competitive practices and protect consumer interests. The Competition Commission of India was established to enforce the Competition Act and assumes the role of competition advocacy.
This document provides an overview of competition policy and law in India. It discusses the early stages of India's planned economic development and transition to economic reforms since 1991. This led to the enactment of the Competition Act of 2002 and establishment of the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to prevent anti-competitive practices. The CCI regulates combinations (mergers and acquisitions) by requiring compulsory notification above certain thresholds. Combinations are assessed based on their impact on competition and orders passed for approval or modification. Relevant provisions and procedures related to combination regulation aim to balance effective competition with business certainty.
The document provides an overview of the procedures for investigating combinations (mergers and acquisitions) by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It discusses key aspects of the regulatory framework including relevant sections of the Competition Act that establish thresholds and notification requirements for combinations. It also describes CCI's process for reviewing combinations, considering various factors to determine if the combination causes an appreciable adverse effect on competition. The document highlights challenges in enforcing competition laws for combinations and compares CCI's role to predicting outcomes like an astrologer.
The document outlines a presentation by Kalpeshkumar L. Gupta on regulation of combinations under the Competition Act 2002 in India. The presentation covers an introduction to the Competition Commission of India (CCI), regulations around combinations, recent CCI orders on combinations, and concludes with noting the smooth approval procedure of CCI in its first year of regulating combinations. It also includes two examples of CCI approving major acquisitions by Aditya Birla Group and News Corporation.
The document outlines the presentation given by Kalpeshkumar L. Gupta on the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It provides definitions of key terms related to competition law like cartel and discusses provisions of the Competition Act of 2002 regarding anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and combinations. It also summarizes the regulatory framework around combinations and filing requirements to notify CCI of proposed mergers, acquisitions and other deals.
A detailed presentation on the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 ,in so far as it relates to the anti-competitive agreements and cartels during a seminar on competition policy and law in Kerala. This was a part of advocacy function of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
This document summarizes key aspects of competition law in India related to the regulation of combinations or mergers and acquisitions. It outlines the thresholds and criteria for mandatory pre-notification of combinations, as well as the review process and factors considered in assessing potential anti-competitive effects. It also compares India's regulations with international best practices and jurisdictions. Penalties for non-compliance with the regulatory framework are also summarized.
A exposition on the provisions relating to the anti-competitive agreements and cartels during a seminar on competition law and policy in Kolkatta in 2009 as a part of the advocacy functions of the Competition Commission of India(CCI).
The document summarizes key aspects of mergers and acquisitions regulation under the Competition Act of India. It outlines the regulatory framework, including thresholds for mandatory notification of combinations, prohibited combinations, procedures for investigation and orders, penalties for non-compliance, and concerns raised by industry. It also briefly discusses merger control in other major jurisdictions like the US, EU, China and Japan.
The Competition Act of 2002 establishes a Competition Commission of India to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure freedom of trade. It defines key terms like acquisition, agreement, cartel, enterprise, and prohibits anti-competitive agreements that limit production or supply or determine purchase/sale prices. It also prohibits abuse of dominant position by imposing unfair prices or limiting markets. Mergers and acquisitions are considered combinations if they meet certain asset or turnover thresholds for the involved enterprises.
The document discusses competition law and anti-competitive agreements in India. It provides a history of cartels being prohibited in ancient times. It summarizes several international cartel cases involving vitamins, elevators, airlines, and car glass where companies fixed prices, shared markets, and were fined billions of dollars. The document outlines India's Competition Act of 2002 which prohibits anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position. It describes the roles and powers of the Competition Commission of India in investigating cartels and imposing penalties and relief measures.
Mergers and acquisitions ppt @ bec doms Babasab Patil
The document summarizes key aspects of merger regulation under the Competition Act of India, including:
1) It establishes thresholds for mandatory notification of combinations (mergers and acquisitions) to the Competition Commission of India based on the combined assets or turnover of the firms involved.
2) It outlines the procedures for investigation and approval/rejection of proposed combinations by the CCI to determine whether they cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition.
3) It discusses concerns raised by industry regarding certain aspects of the regulatory framework such as the long waiting periods, treatment of intra-group acquisitions, and potential conflicts with securities laws.
The document discusses India's legal environment for business and competition law. It provides an overview of India's transition from a command economy to a more liberalized market, including the introduction of the Competition Act of 2002. The Act aims to promote fair competition in India and established the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to prevent anti-competitive practices. The CCI regulates mergers and acquisitions, abuse of dominance, and monitors anti-competitive agreements. It can impose penalties on firms found violating the Act.
The document discusses the Competition Act of 2002 in India. It provides an overview of the Act's key features including regulations around anti-competitive practices, abuse of dominance, and mergers and acquisitions. It also describes the role of Competition Advocacy and the initiatives taken by the Competition Commission of India to promote awareness. Finally, it outlines 4 case studies that the Commission has reviewed related to alleged violations of the Act, such as a hospital accused of restricting patient choice or bid rigging among manufacturers.
EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF COMPETITION LAWS IN INDIAMritunjay Sengar
India adopted its first competition law, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (MRTP), in 1969. However, economic liberalization in the 1990s and changing global markets revealed the MRTP Act to be outdated. In 1999, a committee was formed to recommend a new competition law. The committee suggested enacting the Competition Act and establishing the Competition Commission of India, replacing the MRTP Act. The Competition Act was passed in 2002 and came into force in 2003, establishing India's modern competition law framework.
This document summarizes the key aspects of the Competition Act of 2002 in India. Some of the main points covered include:
1. The Competition Act was introduced to replace the MRTP Act of 1969 and establish the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to promote fair competition in the market.
2. It aims to prevent anti-competitive practices like price fixing, bid rigging, exclusive dealing etc. and prohibits abuse of dominant market position.
3. Mergers and acquisitions are regulated under the Act to ensure they do not negatively impact competition.
4. CCI has powers to investigate anti-competitive complaints and impose penalties on violations. Its duties include protecting consumer interests and ensuring freedom of
PPT in Company competition in India.
6th semester B.com program,
Shaheed Bhagat singh College (University of Delhi)
It is totally in Indian ACT" company's.
A detailed presentation on the procedure for investigation of combinations for internal training purposes for the staff and officers of the competition commission of India in the law of competition review as it existed at that point of time.
The document summarizes Turkey's economic reforms and competition law and policy. It outlines Turkey's liberalization of markets through privatization, regulation, and strengthening competition law. It describes Turkey's Competition Authority and the Competition Board that oversees enforcement. The Competition Act prohibits cartels, abuse of dominant market positions, and mergers that significantly impede competition. Undertakings found in violation face fines, damages payments, and other sanctions. The reforms aim to promote a sustainable, competitive economy in Turkey.
This document contains frequently asked questions and answers regarding SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. It addresses questions about definitions of terms like associate company and related party. It also discusses corporate governance requirements, materiality of subsidiaries, and disclosure of events. The answers clarify that regulations should be interpreted based on the Companies Act and accounting standards, and provide guidance on compliance with listing regulations.
The document discusses the progression from the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act to the Competition Act in India. It provides details on the objectives, offences recognized, and roles of the commissions under each Act. The MRTP Act aimed to prevent concentration of economic power and control monopolies, while the Competition Act seeks to eliminate anti-competitive practices. It also outlines key factors that led to the need to substitute the MRTP Act, such as it not mentioning certain offending trade practices like abuse of dominance.
Trade related investment measurements 128922,128923Abhi Kvs
This document discusses Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) negotiated during the Uruguay Round of trade talks. It provides background on TRIMs discussions, challenges during negotiations, examples of TRIMs that restrict market access or impose performance requirements, and the structure and aims of the resulting TRIMs Agreement. The Agreement focuses on prohibiting TRIMs that violate GATT national treatment or quantitative restriction provisions. It required WTO members to eliminate notified TRIMs within transition periods and established a standstill preventing new inconsistent TRIMs.
Competition is the best means of ensuring that the ‘Common Man’ or ‘Aam Aadmi’ has access to the broadest range of goods and services at the most competitive prices. With increased competition, producers will have maximum incentive to innovate and specialize. This would result in reduced costs and wider choice to consumers. A fair competition in market is essential to achieve this objective. Our goal is to create and sustain fair competition in the economy that will provide a ‘level playing field’ to the producers and make the markets work for the welfare of the consumers
1. Competition between organizations provides benefits like promoting growth, advancing civilization, and forcing creativity, but can also lead to anti-competitive practices.
2. The Competition Act of 2002 was established to prevent anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant market positions in India.
3. The Act prohibits anti-competitive horizontal agreements between competitors to fix prices or limit production, as well as abuse of dominant market positions by single companies.
The document summarizes India's Competition Act of 2002. It discusses the objectives of the act which are to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote fair competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure freedom of trade. It also outlines prohibited behaviors such as anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant market position. The act established the Competition Commission of India which regulates mergers and acquisitions and can impose penalties for violations.
The document summarizes several U.S. trade preference programs including the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), and the maquiladora program between the U.S. and Mexico. It describes eligibility requirements, rules of origin, products that qualify for duty-free access, and exclusions under each program.
This document provides answers to frequently asked questions regarding SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. It addresses questions about definitions of terms like associate company and related party. It also clarifies requirements around corporate governance, material related party transactions, unlisted subsidiaries, and disclosure of events and financial information. The answers provide guidance on interpreting and complying with various provisions of the listing regulations.
This document is a collection of testimonials from customers of various skincare products from Rodan + Fields. The testimonials describe the customers' experience using products like Acute Care, Reverse Regimen, Soothe, and Unblemish. They note improvements in skin issues like wrinkles, dark spots, redness, and acne within time periods ranging from a few days to several months. The customers express enthusiasm for and confidence in the results delivered by Rodan + Fields products. Photographs are included with many testimonials showing "before and after" comparisons of customers' skin conditions.
This document discusses competition and regulation in India. It begins by outlining the rationale for competition and the benefits it provides like efficiency and lower prices. However, perfect competition is difficult to achieve in reality. Some sectors require regulation due to natural monopolies or to ensure standards and access. Both competition laws and sector regulations aim to promote consumer welfare, but they can sometimes overlap or conflict in their approaches. The document examines regulatory frameworks in other countries and how they coordinate competition authorities and sector regulators. It argues that in India, laws could better delineate jurisdictions and provide for consultation between authorities to minimize conflicts and maximize benefits of competition.
A exposition on the provisions relating to the anti-competitive agreements and cartels during a seminar on competition law and policy in Kolkatta in 2009 as a part of the advocacy functions of the Competition Commission of India(CCI).
The document summarizes key aspects of mergers and acquisitions regulation under the Competition Act of India. It outlines the regulatory framework, including thresholds for mandatory notification of combinations, prohibited combinations, procedures for investigation and orders, penalties for non-compliance, and concerns raised by industry. It also briefly discusses merger control in other major jurisdictions like the US, EU, China and Japan.
The Competition Act of 2002 establishes a Competition Commission of India to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure freedom of trade. It defines key terms like acquisition, agreement, cartel, enterprise, and prohibits anti-competitive agreements that limit production or supply or determine purchase/sale prices. It also prohibits abuse of dominant position by imposing unfair prices or limiting markets. Mergers and acquisitions are considered combinations if they meet certain asset or turnover thresholds for the involved enterprises.
The document discusses competition law and anti-competitive agreements in India. It provides a history of cartels being prohibited in ancient times. It summarizes several international cartel cases involving vitamins, elevators, airlines, and car glass where companies fixed prices, shared markets, and were fined billions of dollars. The document outlines India's Competition Act of 2002 which prohibits anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position. It describes the roles and powers of the Competition Commission of India in investigating cartels and imposing penalties and relief measures.
Mergers and acquisitions ppt @ bec doms Babasab Patil
The document summarizes key aspects of merger regulation under the Competition Act of India, including:
1) It establishes thresholds for mandatory notification of combinations (mergers and acquisitions) to the Competition Commission of India based on the combined assets or turnover of the firms involved.
2) It outlines the procedures for investigation and approval/rejection of proposed combinations by the CCI to determine whether they cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition.
3) It discusses concerns raised by industry regarding certain aspects of the regulatory framework such as the long waiting periods, treatment of intra-group acquisitions, and potential conflicts with securities laws.
The document discusses India's legal environment for business and competition law. It provides an overview of India's transition from a command economy to a more liberalized market, including the introduction of the Competition Act of 2002. The Act aims to promote fair competition in India and established the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to prevent anti-competitive practices. The CCI regulates mergers and acquisitions, abuse of dominance, and monitors anti-competitive agreements. It can impose penalties on firms found violating the Act.
The document discusses the Competition Act of 2002 in India. It provides an overview of the Act's key features including regulations around anti-competitive practices, abuse of dominance, and mergers and acquisitions. It also describes the role of Competition Advocacy and the initiatives taken by the Competition Commission of India to promote awareness. Finally, it outlines 4 case studies that the Commission has reviewed related to alleged violations of the Act, such as a hospital accused of restricting patient choice or bid rigging among manufacturers.
EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF COMPETITION LAWS IN INDIAMritunjay Sengar
India adopted its first competition law, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (MRTP), in 1969. However, economic liberalization in the 1990s and changing global markets revealed the MRTP Act to be outdated. In 1999, a committee was formed to recommend a new competition law. The committee suggested enacting the Competition Act and establishing the Competition Commission of India, replacing the MRTP Act. The Competition Act was passed in 2002 and came into force in 2003, establishing India's modern competition law framework.
This document summarizes the key aspects of the Competition Act of 2002 in India. Some of the main points covered include:
1. The Competition Act was introduced to replace the MRTP Act of 1969 and establish the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to promote fair competition in the market.
2. It aims to prevent anti-competitive practices like price fixing, bid rigging, exclusive dealing etc. and prohibits abuse of dominant market position.
3. Mergers and acquisitions are regulated under the Act to ensure they do not negatively impact competition.
4. CCI has powers to investigate anti-competitive complaints and impose penalties on violations. Its duties include protecting consumer interests and ensuring freedom of
PPT in Company competition in India.
6th semester B.com program,
Shaheed Bhagat singh College (University of Delhi)
It is totally in Indian ACT" company's.
A detailed presentation on the procedure for investigation of combinations for internal training purposes for the staff and officers of the competition commission of India in the law of competition review as it existed at that point of time.
The document summarizes Turkey's economic reforms and competition law and policy. It outlines Turkey's liberalization of markets through privatization, regulation, and strengthening competition law. It describes Turkey's Competition Authority and the Competition Board that oversees enforcement. The Competition Act prohibits cartels, abuse of dominant market positions, and mergers that significantly impede competition. Undertakings found in violation face fines, damages payments, and other sanctions. The reforms aim to promote a sustainable, competitive economy in Turkey.
This document contains frequently asked questions and answers regarding SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. It addresses questions about definitions of terms like associate company and related party. It also discusses corporate governance requirements, materiality of subsidiaries, and disclosure of events. The answers clarify that regulations should be interpreted based on the Companies Act and accounting standards, and provide guidance on compliance with listing regulations.
The document discusses the progression from the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act to the Competition Act in India. It provides details on the objectives, offences recognized, and roles of the commissions under each Act. The MRTP Act aimed to prevent concentration of economic power and control monopolies, while the Competition Act seeks to eliminate anti-competitive practices. It also outlines key factors that led to the need to substitute the MRTP Act, such as it not mentioning certain offending trade practices like abuse of dominance.
Trade related investment measurements 128922,128923Abhi Kvs
This document discusses Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) negotiated during the Uruguay Round of trade talks. It provides background on TRIMs discussions, challenges during negotiations, examples of TRIMs that restrict market access or impose performance requirements, and the structure and aims of the resulting TRIMs Agreement. The Agreement focuses on prohibiting TRIMs that violate GATT national treatment or quantitative restriction provisions. It required WTO members to eliminate notified TRIMs within transition periods and established a standstill preventing new inconsistent TRIMs.
Competition is the best means of ensuring that the ‘Common Man’ or ‘Aam Aadmi’ has access to the broadest range of goods and services at the most competitive prices. With increased competition, producers will have maximum incentive to innovate and specialize. This would result in reduced costs and wider choice to consumers. A fair competition in market is essential to achieve this objective. Our goal is to create and sustain fair competition in the economy that will provide a ‘level playing field’ to the producers and make the markets work for the welfare of the consumers
1. Competition between organizations provides benefits like promoting growth, advancing civilization, and forcing creativity, but can also lead to anti-competitive practices.
2. The Competition Act of 2002 was established to prevent anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant market positions in India.
3. The Act prohibits anti-competitive horizontal agreements between competitors to fix prices or limit production, as well as abuse of dominant market positions by single companies.
The document summarizes India's Competition Act of 2002. It discusses the objectives of the act which are to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote fair competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure freedom of trade. It also outlines prohibited behaviors such as anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant market position. The act established the Competition Commission of India which regulates mergers and acquisitions and can impose penalties for violations.
The document summarizes several U.S. trade preference programs including the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), and the maquiladora program between the U.S. and Mexico. It describes eligibility requirements, rules of origin, products that qualify for duty-free access, and exclusions under each program.
This document provides answers to frequently asked questions regarding SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. It addresses questions about definitions of terms like associate company and related party. It also clarifies requirements around corporate governance, material related party transactions, unlisted subsidiaries, and disclosure of events and financial information. The answers provide guidance on interpreting and complying with various provisions of the listing regulations.
This document is a collection of testimonials from customers of various skincare products from Rodan + Fields. The testimonials describe the customers' experience using products like Acute Care, Reverse Regimen, Soothe, and Unblemish. They note improvements in skin issues like wrinkles, dark spots, redness, and acne within time periods ranging from a few days to several months. The customers express enthusiasm for and confidence in the results delivered by Rodan + Fields products. Photographs are included with many testimonials showing "before and after" comparisons of customers' skin conditions.
This document discusses competition and regulation in India. It begins by outlining the rationale for competition and the benefits it provides like efficiency and lower prices. However, perfect competition is difficult to achieve in reality. Some sectors require regulation due to natural monopolies or to ensure standards and access. Both competition laws and sector regulations aim to promote consumer welfare, but they can sometimes overlap or conflict in their approaches. The document examines regulatory frameworks in other countries and how they coordinate competition authorities and sector regulators. It argues that in India, laws could better delineate jurisdictions and provide for consultation between authorities to minimize conflicts and maximize benefits of competition.
Este documento presenta la lista de candidatos a cargos en el municipio escolar de la Institución Educativa "José Carlos Mariátegui" para el período 2014-2015. Incluye el nombre del director, la coordinadora de actividades y 10 candidatos para cargos como alcalde, teniente alcalde, y regidores de salud, ecología, defensa civil, educación vial, educación cultura y deporte, y turismo, así como un representante de CONEI y apoyo.
Academic Journals es un sitio web que publica revistas académicas revisadas por pares. Ofrece más de 200 revistas en una variedad de disciplinas, incluidas ciencias agrícolas, ingeniería, ciencias de la salud y ciencias sociales. Las revistas cubren investigaciones originales, revisiones, cartas breves y casos.
This document provides career and passion advice in 8 tips. It recommends choosing a career focused on something you love and are skilled at. The tips suggest developing in-demand skills, investing in self-study and courses, finding a team, joining communities, doing regular SWOT and needs analyses, and balancing learning, work and growth over time. Contact information is provided for further career coaching.
1) The study evaluated a supportive reading habit project at Choowicharat School and compared results before and after the project's implementation.
2) It found that before the project, the environment and factors like basic skills were at a medium level. After the project, these were found to be at a high level.
3) Comparisons of the environment, basic factors, process, and productions showed statistically significant improvements at the 0.1 level after the project.
This document lists the names of various artists and artworks. It includes 18 artist names, some with additional details like the title of the artwork. The majority of names appear to be individual artists, but a few have multiple listings, indicating they may have multiple works included or described. Overall this summary provides an inventory of artists and art pieces, without any additional context about the meaning or purpose of the document.
This document provides an overview of basic concepts in underwriting for individual family takaful schemes. It discusses several key points, including the main causes of death, the concepts of sum cover, contribution, insurable interest, and others. It then discusses how to calculate items like sum cover, accumulated tabarru fund, and previous certificates. The document outlines guidelines for new business applications, including how to properly fill out proposal forms. It also discusses various aspects of underwriting like non-medical, medical, residence, and financial underwriting. Specific considerations for underwriting female lives are presented.
The document provides an overview of competition policy and law in India. It discusses the evolution of competition law from the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (MRTP Act) of 1969 to the enactment of the Competition Act of 2002. Key highlights include:
- The MRTP Act was replaced as it had become obsolete with economic reforms since 1991 that focused on reducing regulations.
- The Competition Act of 2002 established the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote fair competition, protect consumer interests and ensure freedom of trade.
- The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position and regulates combinations. It provides the Commission powers to investigate cartels and impose penalties
This document provides an overview of competition law and policy in India. It discusses the early stages of India's economic development which involved extensive public sector control and regulations. Economic reforms since 1991 have gradually reduced regulations and opened the economy to market forces. This led to the establishment of the Competition Commission of India in 2003 to administer the Competition Act of 2002. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and regulates combinations or mergers above certain thresholds. It aims to prevent anti-competitive practices and promote competition for the benefit of consumers. The Commission has powers to investigate violations, impose penalties, and provide remedies.
The document summarizes key principles from the International Competition Network (ICN) regarding merger notification regimes. It discusses 9 recommended practices from the ICN, including having clear notification thresholds, reasonable review periods, procedural fairness, transparency, and protecting confidential information. For each practice, it provides India's position based on its new merger notification law, noting areas of alignment like review periods being similar to other jurisdictions, as well as aspects where guidelines will be further developed over time, like procedures for substantive assessment. The document aims to show how India's new regime follows ICN best practices to have an efficient and effective merger review process.
The document provides an overview of competition law in India, including the Competition Act of 2002 and amendments made in 2007. It discusses key provisions around anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominance, and regulation of mergers and combinations. The amendments in 2007 made merger notifications mandatory, established the Competition Appellate Tribunal, and rationalized penalties. The document also analyzes issues around implementation of the law and proposes remedial measures like reducing timelines and revising thresholds to promote growth while preventing anti-competitive practices.
This document summarizes India's new merger control regime established in 2011. Some key points:
- The Competition Commission of India was established to regulate combinations (mergers and acquisitions) that meet certain asset or turnover thresholds.
- Reviews must be completed within 210 days (180 days for simpler cases), similar to other major jurisdictions like the EU.
- Factors for assessing potential anti-competitive effects are listed. Thresholds were increased by 50% and include both domestic and international transactions.
- The CCI can approve deals, approve with modifications, or not approve. Silence within the review period means approval.
While benefiting from the available best practices as compiled and recommended by the international competition network(ICN),India has ensured that the merger control regime adopted by India takes into account the ground economic realities of the country. Inter alia, the detailed factors of determination contain factors for consideration by the CCI which give CCI is enough flexibility to factor in the social realities by ensuring a fair merger review.The presentation analyses this and compares India's merger regime with the merger regime of some comparable countries.
The document discusses the interface between sector regulators and the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It notes that while sector regulators focus on technical standards and access in specific industries, the CCI promotes overall competition across sectors. There is potential for disagreements without clear jurisdiction delineation or coordination. However, coordination allows each to play distinct roles, with sector regulators considering competition and CCI overcoming market failures. The document outlines coordination mechanisms like information sharing and referrals between the CCI and sector regulators under various laws. It emphasizes promoting competition, efficiency, and consumer interests in all sectors.
The document summarizes key aspects of India's competition law framework. It outlines that competition law in India was triggered by the constitution and the first law was the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act of 1969. This was replaced by the Competition Act of 2002 to promote competition and private enterprise.
The Competition Act established the Competition Commission of India and has four main parts - regulating anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominance, combination regulation, and competition advocacy. It aims to facilitate competition, establish the CCI to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote market competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure trade freedom. The CCI has powers like imposing penalties, modifying or blocking combinations, and separating dominant enterprises.
A presentation before IAS officers of about 15 years of seniority into the merger review procedure in in India along with various issues raised by the stakeholders and challenges ahead.
This document provides an overview of privatization in Pakistan, including:
- Privatization has occurred in waves since the 1960s, accelerating in the 1990s when over 165 transactions generated $9 billion in proceeds.
- The Privatization Commission was established in 2000 to manage Pakistan's privatization program and recommend privatization policies.
- Pakistan has successfully privatized state-owned enterprises across several sectors, including banking, energy, chemicals and fertilizers. This has generated tax revenue and improved products/services.
- However, challenges remain such as losses in some state-owned enterprises and the impact of recent financial crises and constitutional amendments. The document calls for strengthening strategic privatization deals and transparency.
Presentation on The competition act(2002)satya pal
The document summarizes the key aspects of the Competition Act of 2002 in India. It discusses the objectives of eliminating anti-competitive practices and promoting fair competition. The main features covered are the prohibition of anti-competitive agreements such as cartels, abuse of dominant market positions, and regulations governing mergers and acquisitions. Enforcement is carried out by the Competition Commission of India through investigations and imposition of penalties. The act aims to protect consumer welfare and ensure fair competition in the market.
The document outlines India's industrial policies from the First Five Year Plan in 1951 to recent changes in the early 2000s. It discusses the rationale for industrial policies, including balancing development, efficient use of resources, and preventing monopolies. Key aspects of industrial policies over the decades included the public, private, and joint sectors, licensing, foreign investment rules, and the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act. Major changes in the 1990s included deregulation, liberalization, allowing higher foreign investment, and reducing the number of reserved industries.
The document discusses India's competition law and the roles and powers of the Competition Commission of India in regulating anti-competitive practices such as cartels and abuse of dominance. It outlines the definitions, assessment factors, investigation powers, and orders that the CCI can issue against cartelization and abuse of dominance positions in order to promote competition in India.
The document discusses deregulation in Ukraine. It provides an overview of Ukraine's poor ratings in terms of doing business and economic freedom compared to other countries. It then discusses why a "guillotine" approach to deregulation that abolishes all regulations at once is not advisable, as Ukraine has international obligations and harmonized legislation with the EU. The document outlines a vision for deregulation reform through decreasing regulations and inspections while strengthening regulatory bodies. It proposes establishing a Better Regulation Delivery Office to review legislation sector by sector and guide deregulation efforts. Several initial deregulation initiatives and their results are highlighted.
The document discusses the importance of competition and the need for competition laws when global trade is taking place on a single platform. It notes that India enacted the Competition Act 2002 to establish a new competition regime and foster competition in markets after economic reforms in 1991 made the previous MRTP Act inadequate. The Act aims to eliminate anti-competitive practices and promote competition for the benefit of consumers.
This document provides an overview of privatization in Pakistan. It discusses three generations of privatization that have occurred since the 1960s, with the objectives of strengthening the private sector, improving state-owned enterprise efficiency, and reducing subsidies. More than 165 transactions have generated over $9 billion in proceeds. The Privatization Commission oversees the process of evaluating, restructuring and selling state assets to private investors. Several sectors have been fully or partially privatized, including banking, fertilizers, cement and automobiles. Challenges remain around regulatory frameworks, financial crises, and managing public interests for certain industries. The document recommends maintaining transparency and public awareness to help further privatization efforts.
The Competition Act, 2002 aims to promote fair competition in India and protect consumer interests. It replaced the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act of 1969. The key objectives of the Competition Act are to prevent anti-competitive practices, promote competition, protect consumer interests, and ensure freedom of trade. The Act prohibits anti-competitive agreements between companies, abuse of dominant market position, and regulates combinations/mergers above certain financial thresholds. It established the Competition Commission of India to enforce the competition laws and regulations in the country.
- The document outlines the Companies (Cost Records and Audit) Rules, 2014 in India, which specify the class of companies required to maintain cost records and get such records audited.
- It provides definitions for key terms and specifies two categories of sectors - regulated sectors like telecom, electricity, petroleum, drugs, fertilizers and sugar, and non-regulated sectors like machinery, turbo jets, arms and ammunition etc.
- It provides thresholds based on overall company turnover from all products and services for the applicability of cost record rules and cost audit rules. Micro, small enterprises are exempted.
Similar to Regulation of combinations training for central government officers (us & others) 2008 (20)
Competition Law is in an evolutionary stage in India having completed a little over five years in India. The orders in the initial stage of enforcement have a huge impact on the progress of this law in the country. Here, K K Sharma ex Director General, CCI discusses the 3:2 order of CCI in Jaypee case. In this case by a slender majority of one, the Commission decided not to impose any fine on Jaypee group holding it not to be dominant in the relevant market. The Market definition itself was changed. Earlier DG was asked to investigate according to a particular market definition but when the report of DG was submitted , the majority did not agree and went back to earlier definition in which the group was not dominant. The author who , now, is Chairman, KK Sharma Law Offices discusses in detail this case in this article.
Merger Review process has evolved over a period of time. This is evident from the changing focus on consideration of efficiencies in merger analysis. However, a cross-country comparison shows that as of date consideration of efficiency has become almost an integral part of merger review. The article details this discussion.
This document summarizes the key regulations of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) regarding combinations. It discusses Regulations 5-7, 12, 18-22, 24, 26-27, 36, 39, 41, 46, 54-55 which cover notification procedures and timelines for combinations, flexibility in filing notices, fees, additional time provisions, acceptance of belated or revised notices, deemed approvals, expert assistance, opportunities to be heard, modifications to orders, independent trustees to oversee compliance, and confidentiality of information. The regulations aim to facilitate business transactions with no significant competition issues, provide flexibility, and follow international best practices of organizations like the International Competition Network.
This document discusses competition regulation and the relationship between sector regulators and competition authorities in various jurisdictions. It notes that most countries establish both sector regulators to oversee specific industries as well as general competition authorities. However, overlaps and conflicts can sometimes arise between the two. The document explores various approaches that countries take to managing the relationship and resolving potential conflicts between these two types of regulatory bodies, including through statutory provisions for consultation, concurrence on decisions, and mechanisms for resolving disputes. It provides examples from jurisdictions like the EU, UK, Australia and others to illustrate different models for structuring the high-level relationship between sector regulators and competition authorities.
As a part of the advocacy efforts of the Competition Commission of India(CCI),a presentation to explain the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002, in so far as they relate to the abuse of dominant position in a conference in collaboration with Kerala High Court in Kochi.
The document summarizes the development and implementation of merger control regulations in India by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). It discusses how there was initial opposition to bringing merger control provisions into force, but that the CCI was finally able to notify final merger regulations in May 2011. It describes some initial amendments made by the CCI in 2012 and 2013 to refine the merger review process based on experience. It also notes that after over two years of implementation, it is an appropriate time to review the CCI's performance in regulating combinations and mergers under Indian competition law.
A detailed perspective of the background, the present functioning and the future possibilities of the merger control regime in India as it unfolds with the passage of time by the architect of merger control in India.
This document summarizes a recent ruling by the German Federal Supreme Court that clarified two issues regarding private antitrust enforcement in Germany. The ruling confirmed that indirect purchasers have standing to bring damages claims. It also allowed defendants to use a "pass-on defense" to argue that the claimant passed on some or all of the damages to subsequent purchasers in the supply chain. However, the document notes that the ruling raised new questions about burden of proof standards regarding the pass-on defense that will need to be addressed in future cases.
this article contains a view of merger control in India by way of analysing the clearances given by the competition agency of India and the time taken in different stages. It looks at all the competition review done by CC I and finds out the average clearance time. This is a two-part article. Part one deals with the performance and the outcome in terms of the quickness of clearance. Second part deals with the lessons learnt after the experience of merger review in India for the first time.
This article deals with an in-depth analysis of the doctrine of extraterritoriality contained in the competition law of India which gives CC I jurisdiction require into anti-competitive agreements ,abuses of dominant position and combinations if such agreement or dominant position or combinations have or are likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in the relevant market in India.
The Competition Act 2002 provides for prohibition of abuse of dominant position. However, the provisions of unfair trade practices earlier covered by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969,are not covered under the competition law. The apparent effect of the two being quite similar, there is a considerable possibility that a situation very close to unfair trade practices may be held to be an abuse of dominant position. The difference being very close, the article looks at the penalty handed out to DLF Ltd for abuse of dominant position from this perspective.
(1) There is a need for healthy cooperation between the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and other sector regulators to ensure the quality of economic regulation and avoid conflicts.
(2) While sector regulators have expertise in their industries, CCI has expertise in competition issues. Consultation between the two can help address regulatory issues from both competition and industry perspectives.
(3) The author argues that CCI seeking to provide input into sector regulators' merger and acquisition guidelines, such as those for telecom, is reasonable given CCI's mandate to evaluate combinations under the Competition Act. Regular consultation and coordination between regulators is beneficial.
This document provides an overview of competition law in India and the roles of inquiry and investigation by the Competition Commission of India. It discusses:
1) The meaning and purpose of inquiries and investigations in assessing potential violations of competition law. Inquiries are used to determine if there is a prima facie case for investigation.
2) How inquiries can be triggered by information from various sources and examples of sectors that may warrant inquiry.
3) The importance of inquiries and investigations for a new agency like the Competition Commission of India, and the need to establish standardized procedures to avoid cases being lost on technical grounds.
4) The process and tactics of investigations once an inquiry has found a prima facie case,
The Competition Act 2002 provides for prohibition of abuse of dominant position. However, the provisions of unfair trade practices earlier covered by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969,are not covered under the competition law. The apparent effect of the two being quite similar, there is a considerable possibility that a situation very close to unfair trade practices may be held to be an abuse of dominant position. The difference being very close, the article looks at the penalty handed out to DLF Ltd for abuse of dominant position from this perspective.
The document is a keynote address by K K Sharma at the India FDI Forum in Singapore on May 14, 2010. Some key points:
[1] Sharma thanks the organizers for the event and notes that it is timely as investors are looking for safe places to invest in India's growth story.
[2] While India receives significant FDI, the actual inflows are still a small portion of the country's potential given its inherent economic strength and regulatory systems that protected it in the recent global economic downturn.
[3] India offers long term opportunities for prosperity through partnership, though partnerships require thorough due diligence to understand the real India beyond statistics and ensure it is an informed decision
More from KK Sharma Law Offices (Delhi, Brasilia, Ottawa, UAE, Brussels, Netherlands and Washington DC) (15)
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
إضغ بين إيديكم من أقوى الملازم التي صممتها
ملزمة تشريح الجهاز الهيكلي (نظري 3)
💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
تتميز هذهِ الملزمة بعِدة مُميزات :
1- مُترجمة ترجمة تُناسب جميع المستويات
2- تحتوي على 78 رسم توضيحي لكل كلمة موجودة بالملزمة (لكل كلمة !!!!)
#فهم_ماكو_درخ
3- دقة الكتابة والصور عالية جداً جداً جداً
4- هُنالك بعض المعلومات تم توضيحها بشكل تفصيلي جداً (تُعتبر لدى الطالب أو الطالبة بإنها معلومات مُبهمة ومع ذلك تم توضيح هذهِ المعلومات المُبهمة بشكل تفصيلي جداً
5- الملزمة تشرح نفسها ب نفسها بس تكلك تعال اقراني
6- تحتوي الملزمة في اول سلايد على خارطة تتضمن جميع تفرُعات معلومات الجهاز الهيكلي المذكورة في هذهِ الملزمة
واخيراً هذهِ الملزمة حلالٌ عليكم وإتمنى منكم إن تدعولي بالخير والصحة والعافية فقط
كل التوفيق زملائي وزميلاتي ، زميلكم محمد الذهبي 💊💊
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two HeartsSteve Thomason
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
Temple of Asclepius in Thrace. Excavation resultsKrassimira Luka
The temple and the sanctuary around were dedicated to Asklepios Zmidrenus. This name has been known since 1875 when an inscription dedicated to him was discovered in Rome. The inscription is dated in 227 AD and was left by soldiers originating from the city of Philippopolis (modern Plovdiv).
Elevate Your Nonprofit's Online Presence_ A Guide to Effective SEO Strategies...TechSoup
Whether you're new to SEO or looking to refine your existing strategies, this webinar will provide you with actionable insights and practical tips to elevate your nonprofit's online presence.
Regulation of combinations training for central government officers (us & others) 2008
1. Competition Commission of India
Training for Central Government Officers
(US & Others)
on
REGULATION OF COMBINATIONS
K.K. Sharma
Advisor (Law)
IIC, 26-11-2008
1
2. Early Stages
Planned economic development since early 1950s.
Commanding heights in public sector
Industrial (development & regulation) Act, 1951 and
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act,
1969
Comprehensive control over direction, pattern and quantum of
investment
Extensive reservations and concessions in favour of small – scale
industry
Despite industrial growth/diversification – complex
network of controls/regulations fettered freedom of
enterprises
2
3. Transition
Industrial policy statement of 1980
focused attention on need for promoting competition in domestic
market, technological up gradation and modernization
Reforms since 1991- on a much broader scale and
scope
Industrial policy statement of 1991
emphasized attainment of technological
international competitiveness
dynamism
and
Indian industry could scarcely be competitive with the rest of the
world if it had to operate within an over regulated environment
3
4. Wave of Liberalization
Starting from 1991 – further liberalization of industrial
licensing, dispensing with the requirement of prior
governmental approval before effecting expansion of
undertakings registered under MRTP Act, 1969
Progressively diluting the monopoly of public sector
except for security and statutory concerns
Abolition of levy and non-levy price system
Reducing purchase preference for PSUs
4
5. Strengthening of Reforms
Further reforms of trade policy substantially reduced
the barrier to domestic industries
Common thread running through the economic
reforms-since 1991 – has been to free the economy
from governmental controls and allow market forces
to determine economy activity.
5
6. Expert Group
Singapore ministerial declaration in 1996 – followed
by setting up of an expert group by Union Ministry of
Commerce in Oct. 1997
To study issues relating to interaction between trade
and competition policy, including anti-competitive
practices and the effect of mergers and
amalgamations on competition in order to identify
areas that may merit consideration in the WTO
framework
Expert group, in Jan. 1999 report, suggested
enactment of new Competition Law
6
7. Raghavan Committee
FM on 27-2-1999 declared in budget speech that
MRTPC has become obsolete in the light of
international economic developments relating to
competition laws
High level committee on competition policy and law
constituted in Oct. 99
Inter-alia, the committee noted
in conditions of effective competition, rivals have equal
opportunities to compete for business on the basis and
quality of their outputs, and resource deployment follows
market success in meeting consumers’ demand at the
lowest possible cost
7
8. Need for Overhaul
The Department Related Parliamentary Standing
Committee on Home Affairs, to which the
Competition Bill 2001 was referred for examination
concluded that the rigidly structured MRTP Act also
necessitate its repeal in view of government policy
being a facilitator rather than a regulator
8
9. Law Enacted
In mid term appraisal of 9th five year plan, Planning
Commission recognized the need of a National
Competition Policy
Enactment of Competition Act 2002, pursuant to
Raghavan Committee’s Report
National Common Minimum Programme 2004 (UPA)
desired to strengthen all regulatory institutions to
ensure that competition is free and fair
9
10. Present Status
Competition Act, 2002 enacted in January 2003
Competition Commission of India established in October,
2003 with one Member
Full constitution of Commission and enforcement could
not be taken up due to legal challenge leading to
process of amendments
Competition (Amendment)
September 2007
Act,
2007
passed
in
Process for full constitution of the Commission set in
10
motion
11. Duties of the CCI
Prevent practices
competition
having
adverse
effect
on
Promote and sustain competition in markets
Protect the interests of consumers
Ensure freedom of trade carried on by other
participants in markets, in India
[ Preamble and Section 18]
11
12. Reach of the CCI
All enterprises, whether public or private [S 2(h)/
Expln. cl. (l)]
Departments of government except activities
relatable to sovereign functions including Atomic
energy, Currency, Defence and Space (S 2(h))
Extra-territoriality (S 32)
Provision to enter into MOUs or arrangements with
foreign competition authorities (S 18)
12
13. Broad Provisions of CA 02
Prohibits anti-competitive agreements (S 3)
Prohibits abuse of dominant position (S 4)
Regulates combinations (S 6)
Mandates competition advocacy and awareness (S
49)
13
14. “Combination”
Acquisition of control, shares, voting rights or assets (S
5(a))
Acquiring of control – already having direct or indirect
control over another enterprise in identical or
substitutable goods/services (S 5(b))
Merger or amalgamation (S 5(c))
14
15. “Control”
Inclusive definition
Control includes controlling the affairs or management
by
one or more enterprises, either jointly or singly,
over another enterprise or group
one or more groups, either jointly or singly, over
another group or enterprise
( Expln (a) to S 5)
15
16. “Group”
‘Group’ means two or more enterprises which, directly
or indirectly, are in position to
exercise 26% or more of voting rights in other
enterprise or
appoint more than 50% of members of the board
of directors in the other enterprise
control the management or affairs of the other
enterprise
(Expln (b) to S 5)
16
17. Value of Assets
By taking book value of the assets shown in audited
BOA in immediately preceding FY w.r.t. FY of date of
merger
reduced by depreciation
Value of assets to include
brand value, goodwill, copyright, patent, collective
mark, registered trade mark or similar other
commercial rights
(Expln (c) to S 5)
17
18. Applicability
Combination through acquisition of shares/ voting rights
or assets, acquiring of control and mergers &
amalgamation (S 5)
Combination must be above thresholds and meet
domestic nexus criterion (S 5)
Thresholds defined in terms of total assets or turnover
and domestic nexus (S 5)
18
19. Thresholds for Notification
Assets
Total (In India)
Only in
India
Turn over
Total (In India)
No
Group
Rs. 1000 cr
Rs. 3000 cr
Group
Rs. 4000 cr
Rs. 12000 cr
US $ 500 m (Rs. 500 cr)
(Rs. 2000 cr)
US $ 1500 m (Rs. 1500 cr)
(Rs. 6000 cr)
US $ 2000 m (Rs. 500 cr)
(Rs. 8000 cr)
US$ 6000 m (Rs. 1500 cr)
(Rs. 24000 cr)
No
In and
outside Group
India
Group
19
20. Where does India stand?
Except where indicated otherwise, figures, rounded to full numbers, are in US dollars 1$ = Rs 40/-
Country
Domestic Turnover
World Wide Turnover
Group
Belgium
145 m (DN 58 m)
---
---
Canada
---
---
400 m*
7236 m
(DN 362 m – Community)
---
E.U.
France
---
218 m (DN 73 m)
---
Germany
---
724 m (DN 36 m)
---
U.S.A.
200 m
---
---
U.K.
141 m
---
---
India
750 m
1500 m
6000 m
(World Wide)
m = million
DN = Domestic Nexus
*= Canadian dollar
20
21. Salient Features
Compulsory Notification (S 6 (2))
Form of Notification
Timings of Notification
Suspensive regime (S 6 (2A))
Assessment based on listed factors (S 20(4))
Consequences of not filing (S 43A)
Detailed procedure for inquiry (S 29)
Compares well with RPs of ICN
21
22. Triggering event for notifying
Any document indicating bonafide intention can trigger
filing at the option of the person filing notice
Flexibility for time of filing notice introduced without
liability for not filing notice in time (R 6)
Conforms with ICN best practices
22
23. Notification Forms
Forms (R 6)
simple notification forms seeking readily available
information
Two forms
Form 1 –
30 days
Form 2 - for combinations not likely to cause
AAEC including those between Indian and
foreign companies60 days
Form 3 for information to be filed by banks/PFIs /FIIs/
VCFs (R 7)
23
24. Filing Fee
Legal sanction S 6 (2)
Fee pattern of different jurisdictions studied
Fee pattern of SEBI/ROC in India studied
Detailed consultation with stakeholders
Uniform fee model followed
Uniform fee of Rs. 40 lakhs (R 12)
24
25. Consequences of not notifying
Penalty – which may extend to one percent of the
total turnover or the assets, whichever is higher, of
such a combination (S 43A)
25
26. Suspensive Regime
Combining parties to wait for 210 days (S 6 (2A))
Combination coming into effect, before 210 days,
without order of Commission – Void
If Commission approves combination before 210
days – Combine
If no order up to 210 days – deemed approval of
combination (S 31(11))
First clearance in most cases 30/60 days – CR
26
27. Comparison of Review Periods
Country
Stage One
Stage Two
EU
25-35 W days
90-125 W days (35+125=160 W days or 224 days in the
least)
France
5-8 weeks
Additional 4 months. Further extended by 4 more weeks
(thus 5 ½ Months in total)
Spain
1 month
7 months
Singapore
30 W days
120 W days (30+120=150 W days)
China
30 W days
90-150 W days
Mexico
40 C days
145 (in complex cases)
Japan
30 C days
120 C days (more if information is late)
USA
30/15 C days
-----
Germany
1 month
3 months (1+3= 4 months)
India
30 c days (draft
regulations)
210 C days (150 w days)
27
28. Relevant Market-I
Relevant Geographic Market (S 19(6))
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Regulatory trade barriers
Local specification requirements
National procurement policies
Adequate distribution facilities
Transport costs
Language
Consumer preferences
Need for secure or regular supplies or rapid aftersales services
28
29. Relevant Market-II
Relevant Product Market (S 19(7))
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Physical characteristics or end-use of goods
Price of goods or service
Consumer preference
Exclusion of in-house production
Existence of specialized producers
Classification of industrial products
29
30. Listed Factors for Assessment-I
Factors (S 20(4)):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Actual and potential level of competition through
imports
Extent of barriers to entry into the market
Level of concentration in the market (HHI, CR)
Degree or countervailing power in the market
Likelihood of post combination price/profit
increase
Extent of effective competition in the market – post
combination
Extent to which substitutes are/likely to be available
30
31. Listed Factors for Assessment-II
Factors (S 20(4))
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Market share in the relevant market-individually
and combined
Removal of vigorous and effective competitor
from the market
Nature and extent of vertical integration in the
market
Possibility of failing business
Nature and extent of innovation
Contribution to economic development
Whether the benefit of combination outweigh
adverse effect of combination
31
32. Difficulties
Economy is dynamic- even during review
The viability of proposed combination may change in
the review period
Delay can break/destroy the deal
Challenge to ensure that combination remains viable
after review
The review periods should gradually be brought
down
32
33. The Tough Choice
Unit 1
Unit 2
Commission
Competition
compatibility
Accolades/
criticism
Married Unit
(Combination)
Consumer welfare/
Competition
Marriage
compatibility
Advocates/
Attorneys /C S etc.
Advocacy to show case
Performance (balancing)
33
34. Other Constraints-I
Relatively, politically most sensitive
Politically sensitive issues
Massive lay-offs
Substantial new investments
National pride
Competition policy forms a part of industrial policy1
34
35. Other Constraints-II
Undoing the connection between the two may be an
impossible task
Strongest advocates of competition may be swayed
by political prospects of the creation of a national
champion
Despite perceived lessening of competition, merger of
Boeing and Mc Donnel Douglas, approved by FTC/DOJ1
Eleventh hour clearance by EC- speculated to have been
given to maintain good relation with US
35
36. Inquiry
Mandate for inquiry (S 20/ S 30)
Detailed procedure of investigation (S 29)
Orders of the Commission (S 31)
Substantive test - AAEC
36
37. Procedure in Brief-I
Notification filed (S 6(2))
Opinion by the Commission
Prima facie (1st ) - no AAEC
Order of approval (S 31(1))
If, prima facie (1st ) - AAEC
Show cause notice (S 29(1))
37
38. Procedure in Brief-II
Response to show cause received (S 29(1A))
Commission may call for DG’s report
Prima facie opinion (2nd) - no AAEC
Approval order (S 31(1))
If prima facie opinion (2nd) - AAEC
Direction to publish details of combination (S 29(2))
38
39. Procedure in Brief-III
Commission may invite any person or member of the
public, affected, to file written objections (S29(3))
Commission may call for additional or other information
from parties (S 29(4))
Additional or other information furnished (S 29(5))
Commission to proceed with the case (S 29(6))
Approval (S 31(1))/ Non approval (S 31(2))
39
40. Options and Global Experience
Orders of the Commission:
Approve
Approve with modifications
Not approve
International experience- less than 10/15 percent of
notified combinations seen to have AAEC
Very few (less than one in hundred) blocked
Approval with Structural and/or Behavioral remedies
40
42. Combination Regulations-II
Acquisition
of shares/ voting rights not exceeding 15%,
provided not leading to control,
of assets not directly related to business, solely
as investment, or in ordinary course of
business, provided not leading to control,
of shares/ voting rights where the acquirer hold
more than 50% of shares/voting rights before
acquisition
by succession, will, etc.
of current assets in ordinary course of business
42
43. Combination Regulations-III
in the process of under writing,
pursuant to a bonus or right issue or sub division
of shares
pursuant to an order of the Commission
within a group
of 5% of shares/voting rights per year by an
acquirer who has already acquired 15% or more
43
44. Combination Regulations-IV
specifically exempt under statute of parliament
Amended or renewed tender offer
Where each of at least two of the combining parties
do not have assets / turnover of Rs 200 / 600 crores
in India
44
45. Combination Regulations-V
Special provisions for hostile takeover (R 10)
Permitting additional time when sought by parties (R
18)
Rectification of mistakes (R 20)
Intimation of changes, not affecting assessment (R
22)
Deemed clearance in 30/60 days in most cases (R
26)
45
46. Combination Regulations-VI
Provision for personal appearance of the parties to the
combination / opportunity of being heard before final
order (R 41)
Enabling provision for appointing independent trustees,
at the cost of the parties, for overseeing
orders/directions of the Commission (R 54)
Pre-notification consultation being considered
46
51. Other Penalties
Failure to comply with orders/ directions u/s 27, 28,
31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A – fine upto Rs. one lakh
per day [S 42 & 43 (S 36 (2)/(4)) / 41(2)]
Non furnishing of information on combinations –
upto 1% of turnover/ assets whichever is higher
(S 43A)
Making false statement/ omission to furnish
material information on combinations – not less
than Rs. 50 lakh extendable to Rs. one crore (S
44)
False statement/ omitting information – fine upto
Rs. one crore
Lesser penalty (S46)
51
52. Powers of Enforcement
CCI has powers of a civil court for gathering evidence
After prima facie determination CCI shall direct DG to
investigate (S 26(1))
DG is empowered to investigate into contraventions
of the Act when so directed by the commission and
has the powers of a civil court for gathering evidence
{Section 41(1) & (2)}
52
53. Gathering Evidence
Powers of a civil court for gathering evidence
Summoning and enforcing attendance of any
person and examining him on oath;
Requiring the discovery and production of
documents;
Receiving evidence on affidavits;
Issuing commissions for the examination of
witnesses or documents;
Requisitioning any public record or document
or copy of such record or document from any
office.
53
54. Powers of Director General
Director General (DG) has powers as are vested in
the ‘Inspector’ in terms of Section 240 & 240 A of the
Companies Act, 1956.
These powers, inter-alia, include seizure of
documents with the approval of the Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, when there is
reasonable ground to believe that books, papers or
documents may be destroyed, mutilated, altered,
falsified or secreted. (S 41(3))
54
55. Other Principles in the Act
Competitive neutrality [S 2(h)/expln (l)]
Effects doctrine (S 32)
International co-operation (S 18)
Exclusive jurisdiction in competition matters
(S 53B/ 53T /61)
Confidentiality (S 57/GR 38)
55
56. Present Activities of Commission
Competition advocacy and awareness
Ground-work--professional & legal-including 7 draft
regulations and internal guidelines, etc.
Institutional capacity building, including staffing and
training-IIM B entrusted with organizational study
IIM B suggested – economists 40% , lawyers 40% and
financial analysts etc. 20%-Training – high priority, on
going
56
58. Preparatory Work-II
Draft Competition Commission (Procedure for Engagement
of Experts and Professionals) Regulations 200_
Draft Competition Commission ( Calling upon Experts to
Assist in Conduct of Inquiry) Regulations 200_
Preparation of Advocacy Booklets on
Competition Compliance Programme
Bid rigging
Intellectual Property Rights
Abuse of Dominance
Activities
Cartel
FAQs
58
59. Guiding Principles of CCI
CCI to be in sync with markets
Minimize compliance costs for
enforcement costs for Commission
enterprises
and
Fully professional organization with required skills
Confidentiality for business, transparency for CCI
Consultative approach
59
60. Wide Consultations
An international conference on “India’s New Merger
Notification Regime (INMNR)” held on 15/16, March,
2008 in New Delhi, by IBA & others
Delegates from ICN, EU, FTC, ACCC, IBA, ABA &
leading legal firms across the world attended
Benefiting from the experience of mature, functioning
jurisdictions
60
61. Indian Law in Global Context
WTO : “Law is broadly comparable to those of other
jurisdictions with effective laws in this area and, for the
most part, embodies a modern economics - based
approach” (Trade Policy Review of India 2007)
OECD : “close to state-of-the-art” (Economic Survey
India Report 2007)
61
62. The Road Ahead
Advocacy is already on
The stage is all set for enforcement
The fully constituted CCI expected to be in place in
about a month’s time
Waiting for the curtain to rise
In view of the good background work, expected to
deliver
62