Supreme Court rejects Google’s plea against NCLAT order in Android case

On a request by Google, the court gave the company a week from today to comply with the CCI directives. The CCI had quantified the penalty of ₹1,337.76 crore levied on Google at the rate of 10% of its average turnover for financial years 2018-19, 2019-2020 and 2020-21

January 19, 2023 09:33 pm | Updated January 20, 2023 11:21 am IST - NEW DELHI

The Supreme Court on Thursday affirmed a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order refusing interim relief to Google against a Competition Commission of India (CCI) directive to pay a penalty of ₹1,337.76 crore for "abuse of dominance" in the Android ecosystem.

A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, however, asked NCLAT to decide the tech giant's appeal against the CCI order by March 31, 2023.

On a request by Google, the court gave the company a week from today to comply with the CCI directives. The CCI had quantified the penalty levied on Google at the rate of 10% of its average turnover for financial years 2018-19, 2019-2020 and 2020-21.

Google had moved the apex court after NCLAT, in early January, refused to grant any interim relief while listing its appeal for detailed hearing in April. Google had wanted a stay of the CCI order.

Affirming the NCLAT decision, the court observed in its order that it would "suffice to note that findings in the CCI order cannot be held, at the interlocutory stage, to be either without jurisdiction or suffering from manifest error which would have necessitated interference".

The court desisted from making any comments on the merits of Google's case in order not to affect the pending appeal before the NCLAT. The court however referred to certain findings in the CCI order, including how "Google search is set as a default search service in Google’s own browser Chrome" and about the bundling strategy of Google which "helps further its dominance across markets and affects the contestability and vitality of competition in markets, such as search, web browsing, online advertising, etc".

"These findings cannot be regarded contrary to the weight of the record at the interlocutory stage," the court noted.

The court said it could have remitted the matter back to the NCLAT to consider the question of interim relief afresh, but that would have delayed the time schedule set out by the tribunal in the appeal hearing.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.