| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2587 2019 SLD 2587 2019 CLD 1006 |
Competition Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad
Appeal No. 6 of 2017, decision Dated: 15-01-2019. Dates of hearing: 14th March, 9th, 24th May, 16th June, 13th September, 3rd, 18th, 25th October, 2017, 20th February, 21st March, 10th April, 26th June, 3rd July, 5th August, 16th October, 7th, 20th, 27th
JUSTICE (RETD.) MIAN FASIH UL MULK, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICE (RETD.) MIFTAH-UD-DIN, MEMBER TECHNICAL AHMED OWAIS PIRZADA, MEMBER TECHNICAL
Petitioner(s) by: Habib Ahmed Bhatti
Respondent(s) by: Saad Amir No.1.
Appeal No. 6 of 2017, decision Dated: 15-01-2019. Dates of hearing: 14th March, 9th, 24th May, 16th June, 13th September, 3rd, 18th, 25th October, 2017, 20th February, 21st March, 10th April, 26th June, 3rd July, 5th August, 16th October, 7th, 20th, 27th
JUSTICE (RETD.) MIAN FASIH UL MULK, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICE (RETD.) MIFTAH-UD-DIN, MEMBER TECHNICAL AHMED OWAIS PIRZADA, MEMBER TECHNICAL
Petitioner(s) by: Habib Ahmed Bhatti
Respondent(s) by: Saad Amir No.1.
JCR-VIS RATING COMPANY LTD.
VS
COM COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS
Law: Competition Act, 2010
Section: 3,3(2)(1)
Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----S. 3--- Anti-Competitive bids--- Predatory pricing strategy---Condemned unheard, principle of---Applicability---Appellant had participated in bid---Pakistan Credit Rating Agency filed complaint with Competition Commission that appellant participated in a bid to procure credit rating and it was anti-competitive---Competition Commission terminated bid of appellant on grounds that appellant was guilty of indulging into exclusionary conduct based on predatory pricing strategy---Validity---Competition Commission had only framed issues favourable to complainant and relevant pleas were not reflected in issues framed with the result that appellant had not been afforded an opportunity to lead evidence in support of issues raised---During bidding process agreement was made with Banks and other financial institutions but said process was cancelled by Competition Commission without affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned---Competition Appellate Tribunal remanded the matter as all concerned had been condemned unheard and that proper issues on contentions of all the parties were neither framed nor answered---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: JUSTICE (R) MIFTAH-UD-DIN, MEMBER TECHNICAL--- The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 27-01-2017 whereby the appellant was found guilty of indulging into Exclusionary conduct based on alleged predatory pricing strategy in violation of section 3(3) read with subsections 3(2) and (1) of Competition Act and imposed a penalty of Rs.5 lacs. Neelam Jhelum Hydro Power Company was directed to cancel the impugned bid forthwith and file compliance report with the office of Registrar. It was further ordered that Neelam Jhelum Hydro Power Company may conduct a fresh bid pertaining to the credit rating for the proposed issue of sukuk comprising of Pak Rs. 100 Billion. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Pakistan Credit Rating Agency Ltd. (PACRA) lodged a complaint with the learned Competition Commission of Pakistan found it on the allegations, that the appellant participated in a bid to procure a credit rating assignment for sukuk issue of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492