SOME BASIC QUESTIONS: To know Act is clear to the presenting group Q. Define Competition Act 2002.
A. An Act to provide, keeping in view of the economic development of the country, for the establishment of a Commission to prevent practices having adverse effect on competition, to promote and sustain competition in markets, to protect the interests of consumers and to ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants in markets, in India, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Q. What is an enterprise?
A. "Enterprise" means a person or a department of the Government, who or which is, or has been, engaged in any activity, relating to the production, storage, supply, distribution, acquisition or control of articles or goods, or the provision of services, of any kind, or in investment, or in the business of acquiring, holding, underwriting or dealing with shares, debentures or other securities of any other body corporate, either directly or through one or more of its units or divisions or subsidiaries, whether such unit or division or subsidiary is located at the same place where the enterprise is located or at a different place or at different places, but does not include any activity of the Government relatable to the sovereign functions of the Government including all activities carried on by the departments of the Central Government dealing with atomic energy, currency, defence and space.
BCCI’s unfair deals in IPL
TOI – Feb 8, ‘13
NEW DELHI: Fair trade regulator competition commission on Friday held that the Indian cricket board indulged in anti-competitive practices and slapped a penalty of Rs 52.24 crore on it. Observing that BCCI abused its dominant position, the competition commission directed it to "cease and desist" from any practice in future denying market access to potential competitors, including inclusion of similar clauses in any future agreement. The complaint was filed by a city-based individual, Surinder Singh Barmi against BCCI in November 2010. His allegations were based on issues related to IPL and a professional cricket league tournament conducted by BCCI. "... The abuse by BCCI was of a grave nature and the quantum of penalty that needs to be levied should be commensurate with the gravity of the violation," CCI said in an order on Friday. The fair trade regulator has imposed a penalty of Rs 52.24 crore on BCCI. Among others, the complainant had alleged irregularities in the grant of franchise rights for team ownership, media rights for coverage of the league and award of sponsorship rights. Noting that BCCI's economic power is enormous "as a regulator that enables it to pick winners", the regulator said the cricket board has gained tremendously in financial terms from the Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket format. "Virtually, there is no other competitor in the market nor was anyone allowed to emerge due to BCCI's strategy of monopolizing the entire market," the order said. The policy of BCCI to keep out other competitors and to use their position as a de facto regulatory body has prevented many players who could have opted for the competitive league, it added. "The dependence of competitors on BCCI for sanctioning of the events and dependence of players and consumers for the same reason has been total. BCCI knowing this had foreclosed the competition by openly declaring that it was not going to sanction any other event," CCI said. The commission observed that BCCI undermined the moral responsibility of a custodian and de facto regulator. However, it said that BCCI in their submissions have claimed that the funds of IPL have been re-ploughed in developing the game. On account of this, the regulator said that it considers "appropriate that the penalty of six per cent of average annual revenue of BCCI for past three years". Thus, the penalty amount works out to Rs 52.24 crore, which is to be deposited within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document