As a general rule, anti-competitive practices are considered illegal only when the practice results in a significant weakening of competition, which is why a company that must be sanctioned for any form of anti-competitive behaviour must, in general, be a monopoly or dominant enterprise in a duopoly or oligopoly with a significant influence on the market. Anti-competitive behaviour can be divided into two classifications. Horizontal restrictions relate to anti-competitive behaviour that involves competitors at the same level of the supply chain. These practices include mergers, agreements, agreements, agreements, price agreements, price discrimination and predatory pricing. The second category, on the other hand, is vertical moderation, which introduces restrictions on competitors because of anti-competitive practices between firms at different levels. B of the supply chain, including supplier-distributor relationships. These practices include exclusive trade, refusal of trade/sale, maintenance of resale price and much more. It is generally difficult to engage in anti-competitive practices unless the parties concerned have significant market power or state support. This debate on the moralization of certain business practices, described as anti-competitive, continued both in the study of the history of the economy and in popular culture, as in the appearances in Europe in 2012 by Bruce Springsteen, who sang about bankers as “greedy thieves” and “barbarian thieves”. [14] During the Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011, the term was used by populist Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders in his attacks on Wall Street. He said: “We believe in this country; we love this country; and we will be damned when we see a handful of robber barons control the future of this country. [15] The business practices and political power of Silicon Valley billionaires have also led to them identifying themselves as robbers` barons. [16] [17] Identifying a market and defining its dimensions is a “concentration process” that requires the choice of “what turns out to be the clearest picture of the relevant competition process in light of the commercial reality and the purposes of the law.” Supply manipulations are groups of companies that conspire to raise prices or to reduce the quality of goods or services offered in public tenders.

While this anti-competitive practice is illegal, it costs governments and taxpayers in OECD countries billions of dollars each year. Given this power of the ICC, it becomes essential that parties present in India be aware of the agreements that may fall within the framework of the designation “anti-competitive”. In this newsletter, we will discuss the situations and conditions under which an agreement may become anti-competitive. Competition in a market may be limited to other than those described above. For example, there may be other types of agreements between competitors, such as price guidelines or recommendations, joint purchase or sale, setting technical or technical design standards, and the trade information exchange agreement. The CCCS will take action in the event of significant adverse effects on competition, i.e. when competition is severely hampered. In the case of price guidelines or recommendations, CCCS stated that mandatory or voluntary price recommendations and pricing rules are generally dangerous to competition and encourage all firms to set their prices independently.

Article 19, paragraph 1 of the Act provides that, in the event of payment of the fees and the prescribed terms, the ICC may request any alleged violation of Section 3 (1) of the Act itself or in the case of receiving information from individuals, consumers or their association or professional association. The ICC may also act when the central government or a state government or legal authority refers to it. The ICC only continues the investigation in cases of prima facie and then orders the Director General to open an investigation into this