https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233711 The Commission concluded that there was no prima facie case against the pharmaceutical company (OP) for contravening sections 3 or 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. It determined that the alleged anti-competitive license agreements did not significantly affect competition in India, as the market for the OP's patented drugs was minimal and dominated by generic products from Indian companies. Furthermore, the OP was not found to hold a dominant position in the relevant market. Consequently, the matter was closed under section 26(2) of the Act, with all parties being duly informed. en-us Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233711 The Commission concluded that there was no prima facie case against the pharmaceutical company (OP) for contravening sections 3 or 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. It determined that the alleged anti-competitive license agreements did not significantly affect competition in India, as the market for the OP's patented drugs was minimal and dominated by generic products from Indian companies. Furthermore, the OP was not found to hold a dominant position in the relevant market. Consequently, the matter was closed under section 26(2) of the Act, with all parties being duly informed. Case-Laws Law of Competition Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233711