https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414523 A statutory body performing purely regulatory functions under the Advocates Act, 1961 was treated as outside the definition of an "enterprise" under Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, 2002 because the impugned conduct was not economic or commercial in character. As that jurisdictional requirement was not satisfied, allegations of abuse of dominant position under Section 4 could not be examined on merits, and no prima facie basis for interim relief was found. The stated principle is that sovereign or purely regulatory activity by a legal regulator does not attract enterprise status for competition law purposes. en-us Mon, 08 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Nov 2021 07:01:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414523 A statutory body performing purely regulatory functions under the Advocates Act, 1961 was treated as outside the definition of an "enterprise" under Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, 2002 because the impugned conduct was not economic or commercial in character. As that jurisdictional requirement was not satisfied, allegations of abuse of dominant position under Section 4 could not be examined on merits, and no prima facie basis for interim relief was found. The stated principle is that sovereign or purely regulatory activity by a legal regulator does not attract enterprise status for competition law purposes. Case-Laws Law of Competition Mon, 08 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414523