Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal, Holds Investigating Officer Cannot Create Evidence  ||  Supreme Court: NDPS Prosecution Cannot Be Quashed Solely Over Co-Accused’s Disclosure  ||  SC: Tax Classification Depends on Goods' Form at Sale, not their End Use  ||  Delhi High Court: No Material Showing Delhi Police Compromised the 2020 Riots Probe  ||  Madras HC Suggests Mandatory Attachment of Properties Suspected to Be Proceeds of Corruption  ||  P&H High Court: Demolition After Lawyer Flagged Corruption Appears Aimed at Silencing Him  ||  Calcutta High Court: Contempt Proceedings Cannot Be Used to Challenge Orders or Attack Judges  ||  Orissa High Court: Marriage Need Not Be Preserved When the Relationship Has Substantially Eroded  ||  SC: CIRP Can Continue Despite Fraudulent Insolvency Plea That Triggered It  ||  Delhi HC: Senior Citizen May Seek Eviction of Daughter-in-Law for Ill-Treatment    

Air India Limited v. InterGlobe Aviation Limited - (Competition Commission of India) (10 Feb 2016)

Air India complains "predatory" poaching of pilots

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India dismissed Air India’s complaint against Indigo’s (InterGlobe Aviation) act of poaching its trained pilots for having not raised competition concerns. The Commission was of the opinion that an airline recruiting another’s pilots would not bring about structural changes in the operations of the market, particularly since an airline recruiting a pilot had to obtain an NOC from the existing employer. Air India had expressed anguish over the expenditure it incurred for training pilots, and upkeep of their recency, for its fleet of Airbus A320 aircraft, only to have them ‘predatorily’ recruited by Indigo. It claimed Indigo to have acquired a monopolistic 52 per cent market share in the non-metro to non-metro flight sector, having poached Air India pilots and saved itself of training costs.

Tags : PREDATORY RECRUITMENT   ANTI-COMPETITIVE   TRAINING COSTS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved