Controller General of Communication Accounts inaugurates North Zone Review Meeting (See 'Corp Brief') National Arogya Fair 2026 concludes in Shegaon (See 'Corp Brief') IPR - For purpose of passing-off claim, prior use of composite trademark is sufficient to establish prior use of its essential and source-identifying component: HC (See 'Legal Desk') APEDA organises Sikkim Organic Conclave-cum-International Buyer Seller Meet in Gangtok (See 'Corp Brief') 'Double Engine' Momentum Can Fast-Track Kerala's Progress: MoS (See 'Corp Brief') IPR - Where both parties are registered proprietors of identical trademark, action for infringement is barred u/s 28(3) of Trade Marks Act: HC (See 'Legal Desk') Sonowal inaugurates 3 Projects to bolster Inland Waterways on Brahmaputra (See 'Corp Brief') TRAI releases Paper on 'Review of Rating of Properties for Digital Connectivity Regulations' (See 'Corp Brief') India, Israel ink historic MoU in Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector (See 'Corp Brief') Food Processing to play Decisive Role in Realising Vision of Viksit Bharat: Paswan (See 'Corp Brief') MoRTH sensitizes Stakeholders on 'PM RAHAT' - Cashless Treatment of Road Accident Victims (See 'Corp Brief') Nadda to head reconstituted Hindi Advisory Committee in Chemicals Ministry (See 'Corp Brief') MoS urges scaling up bamboo utilisation (See 'Corp Brief') A&C - Liability to pay interest on a decretal amount ceases to run from date funds are made unconditionally available for withdrawal by Decree Holder: HC (See 'Legal Desk') Winners of 'Cyber Security Grand Challenge 2.0' bag total prize pool of Rs. 6.85 Cr (See 'Corp Brief') IBC - Waiver of rights under contract such as debenture trust deed cannot be implied if agreement explicitly requires such waiver to be in writing: SC (See 'Legal Desk') IBC - Manner in which bank classifies loan as non-performing asset for accounting or provisioning purposes does not determine IBC, if debt was restructured and acknowledged in fresh agreements: SC (See 'Legal Desk') IBC - corporate restructuring under IBC must be prioritized over stalled and ineffective proceedings under Companies Act to protect public funds and larger economic interest: SC (See 'Legal Desk') IBC - NCLT can't Reject Sec 7 application citing corporate debtor's financial health, once twin requirements of debt & default are established: SC LB (See 'Legal Desk') Misc - civil suit cannot be rejected at threshold under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC merely because it contains ground of coercion, undue influence or misrepresentation: SC (See 'Legal Desk') IBC - Moratorium u/s 14 of IBC is intended to preserve debtor's estate from creditor actions aimed at debt recovery, but does not interdict sovereign proceedings in rem for attachment or confiscation under Benami Act: SC (See 'Legal Desk') Supreme Court Clears Path For Single Insolvency Proceedings Against Linked Group Companies (See CORP EINSICHT)

CCI penalises beer companies for indulging into cartelisation

Published: Sep 25, 2021

By TIOLCorplaws News Service

NEW DELHI, SEPT 25, 2021: THE Competition Commission of India (‘CCI') passed a final order against three beer companies, namely United Breweries Limited (‘UBL'), SABMiller India Limited (now renamed as Anheuser Busch InBev India Ltd. after being acquired by Anheuser Busch InBev SA/NV) (‘AB InBev') and Carlsberg India Private Limited (‘CIPL') for indulging in cartelisation in the sale and supply of beer in various States and Union Territories in India, including through the platform of All India Brewers' Association (‘AIBA').

As AIBA was found to be actively involved in facilitating such cartelisation, CCI also held AIBA to be in contravention of the provisions of Competition Act, 2002 (the ‘Act'), apart from the beer companies. The period of cartel was held to be from 2009 to at least 10.10.2018 (the date on which the Director General (‘DG') conducted search and seizure operations at the premises of the beer companies), with CIPL joining in from 2012 and AIBA serving as a platform for facilitating such cartelisation since 2013. All three beer companies were lesser penalty applicants before CCI.

Based on evidences of regular communications between the parties collected by the DG during search and seizure, and on the basis of the disclosures made in the lesser penalty applications, CCI found that the three companies engaged in price co-ordination in contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (the ‘Act') in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan, West Bengal, National Capital Territory of Delhi and the Union Territory of Puducherry, in collectively restricting supply of beer in the States of Maharashtra, Odisha and West Bengal in contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(b) of the Act, and in sharing of market in the State of Maharashtra as well as co-ordination with respect to supply of beer to premium institutions in the city of Bengaluru in contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(c) of the Act. CCI also found co-ordination amongst UBL and AB InBev with respect to purchase of second-hand bottles. Further, 4 individuals of UBL, 4 individuals of AB InBev, 6 individuals of CIPL and the Director General of AIBA, were held by CCI to be liable for the anti-competitive conduct of their respective companies/association, in terms of Section 48 of the Act.

Giving benefit of reduction in penalty under the provisions of Section 46 of the Act of 100% to AB InBev and its individuals, 40% to UBL and its individuals and 20% to CIPL and its individuals. The CCI directed UBL and CIPL to pay penalties of approx. Rs 750 crore and Rs 120 crore respectively, besides passing a cease-and-desist order.

TIOL CORP SEARCH

TIOL GROUP WEBSITES