Manipur HC: State Establishments Must Record Transgender Person’s New Name & Gender in Documents  ||  Delhi HC: Failure to Frame Counter Claim Despite Pleadings is Patently Illegal  ||  Mumbai Commission Holds Reliance Retail Liable for Defective AC Replacement Failure  ||  SC Orders ASI to Supervise Repair of Mehrauli’s Ancient Dargahs  ||  SC Reprimands Bihar IPS Officer for Affidavit Supporting Murder Convict  ||  SC Rejects Review Plea on WB SSC Jobs, Upholds Quashing of 25k Appointments  ||  SC Rejects Review Plea on WB SSC Jobs, Upholds Quashing of 25k Appointments  ||  Supreme Court Orders Haridwar Collector Inquiry into Maa Chandi Devi Trust  ||  SC Recommends Statutory Appeal Against DJ’s Compensation Orders  ||  SC Dismisses Petition Challenging 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Elections Over Bogus Voting    

Express Industry Council of India v. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. and Ors. - (Competition Commission of India) (17 Nov 2015)

CCI finds cartel in “intensely competitive” air cargo

MANU/CO/0099/2015

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India found Jet Airways, Indigo Airlines and SpiceJet Limited guilty of contravening competition guidelines. It noted that the airlines had overcharged for freighting cargo, colluding to artificially raise the Fuel Surcharge at a time when costs were reducing. In so doing, the Commission disagreed with the findings of the Director General of Civil Aviation, which had assessed the air cargo industry to be “intensely competitive”. It determined from the close proximity of the surcharge manipulations that “It is neither the requirement of law nor any other jurisprudence that cartels must originate symmetrically, progress symmetrically…colluding parties would like to break the patterns through artificial gaps and arrangements so as to create a facade of competitive behaviour.”

Relevant : Section 3 Competition Act, 2002 Act

Tags : COMPETITION   AIR CARGO   CARTEL   SURCHARGE   COLLUSION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved