SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation  ||  Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case  ||  Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights  ||  Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims  ||  Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation  ||  Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity  ||  Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper  ||  Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration  ||  Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal  ||  Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status    

Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed penalty on Google for "Search Bias" - (08 Feb 2018)

MRTP/ Competition Laws

Competition Commission of India fines Google for abusing dominant position amounting to Rs. 136-crore for "search bias". CCI’s order came in wake of information filed under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 by Consim Info Private Limited (‘the Informant’/ ‘Consim’, now known as Matrimony.com Limited) which is stated to provide internet as a vehicle/ platform for prospective marriage alliances and by Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS) against Google Inc. and Google India Private Limited alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act in the year 2012. The allegations against Google in respect of search results essentially centred around design of Search Engine Result Page (SERP). CCI observed that Google, being the gateway to the internet for a vast majority of internet users due to its dominance in the online web search market, is under an obligation to discharge its special responsibility.

Further, the Commission holds Google to have abused its dominant position on three counts: (a) Ranking of Universal Results prior to 2010 which was not strictly determined by relevance. Rather the rankings were pre-determined to trigger at the 1st, 4th or 10th position on the SERP. Such practice of Google was unfair to the users and was in contravention of the provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Act. (b) Prominent display and placement of Commercial Flight Unit with link to Google’s specialised search options/ services (Flight) amounts to an unfair imposition upon users of search services as it deprives them of additional choices and thereby, such conduct is in contravention of the provisions. (c) The prohibitions imposed under the negotiated search intermediation agreements upon the publishers are unfair as they restrict the choice of these partners and prevent them from using the search services provided by competing search engines. Imposing of unfair conditions on such publishers by Google amounts to violation of the provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the Act.

Further, as competitors were denied access to the online search syndication services market, contravention of Section 4(2)(c) of the Act is also made out. Based on findings of contraventions against Google, CCI imposed a penalty of Rs.135.86 crore upon Google after taking into account its revenue from its India operations only. The final order was passed by a majority of 4-2 with two Members issuing a Dissenting Note. Company has been ordered to deposit the amount within 60 days.

Tags : DOMINANT POSITION   ABUSE   PENALTY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved