Justice Ashok Bhushan-led Benches of the NCLAT have delivered important rulings on the scope of competition law in digital markets.
In the Google Android matter, NCLAT held that tying Google’s proprietary apps with the Play Store and imposing restrictive obligations on original equipment manufacturers could amount to abuse of dominance under the Competition Act.
In the Google Play Store billing case, NCLAT held that Google’s use of its dominant position in the app store ecosystem to protect and promote its own payment system could violate Section 4 of the Competition Act.
In the WhatsApp-Meta matter, NCLAT upheld the CCI’s finding that WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy raised competition concerns, while interfering with certain directions on data sharing.
In Go First’s insolvency, NCLAT upheld the maintainability of a voluntary insolvency plea under Section 10 of the IBC despite objections by aircraft lessors.
Justice Ashok Bhushan-led Benches of the NCLAT have delivered important rulings on the scope of competition law in digital markets.
In the Google Android matter, NCLAT held that tying Google’s proprietary apps with the Play Store and imposing restrictive obligations on original equipment manufacturers could amount to abuse of dominance under the Competition Act.
In the Google Play Store billing case, NCLAT held that Google’s use of its dominant position in the app store ecosystem to protect and promote its own payment system could violate Section 4 of the Competition Act. It also held that penalty must be based on relevant turnover and not total turnover.
In the WhatsApp-Meta matter, NCLAT upheld the CCI’s finding that WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy raised competition concerns, while interfering with certain directions on data sharing.
His Benches have also laid down key principles under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
In Union Bank of India v Dinkar T Venkatasubramanian, a five-member Bench held that NCLAT has no power to review its judgments, though it may recall an order in limited cases of procedural error or sufficient cause.
In Go First’s insolvency, NCLAT upheld the maintainability of a voluntary insolvency plea under Section 10 of the IBC despite objections by aircraft lessors.
In Puneet Kaur v K V Developers, NCLAT held that homebuyer claims reflected in the corporate debtor’s records cannot be ignored merely because the buyers failed to file claims within time, and such liabilities must be considered in the Information Memorandum and dealt with before final approval of the resolution plan.
