| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 2802 2019 SLD 2802 2019 CLD 1152 |
Competition Commission of Pakistan
File No. 68/PB/C&TA/CCP/2016, decision Dated: 06-08-2019.Dates of hearing: 17th November, 2016, 27th April, 25th May,21st November, 2017 and 12th February, 2019.
MS. VADIYYA KHALIL, CHAIRPERSON DR. MUHAMMAD SALEEM, MEMBER DR. SHAHZAD ANSAR, MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by:Ms. Ayesha Tammy Haq, Executive Director, Pharma Bureau for Pharma Bureau.Salman Akram Raja, Advocate Supreme Court, Malik Ghulam Sabir, Advocate and Shakeel Mughal, Advocate for Pharma Bureau.Amanullah, Director Pricing, Abdul Ghaf
File No. 68/PB/C&TA/CCP/2016, decision Dated: 06-08-2019.Dates of hearing: 17th November, 2016, 27th April, 25th May,21st November, 2017 and 12th February, 2019.
MS. VADIYYA KHALIL, CHAIRPERSON DR. MUHAMMAD SALEEM, MEMBER DR. SHAHZAD ANSAR, MEMBER
Petitioner(s) by:Ms. Ayesha Tammy Haq, Executive Director, Pharma Bureau for Pharma Bureau.Salman Akram Raja, Advocate Supreme Court, Malik Ghulam Sabir, Advocate and Shakeel Mughal, Advocate for Pharma Bureau.Amanullah, Director Pricing, Abdul Ghaf
PHARMA BUREAU: IN THE MATTER OF
Law: Competition Act, 2010
Section: 2,3(3),4,30,34
Law: Drugs Act, 1976
Section: 12
(a) Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----S. 3(3)--- "Price discrimination"--- "Price Parallelism"---Connotation---Price parallelism means tendency in an oligopoly market for suppliers to charge identical prices and may come about because suppliers recognizing their mutual interdependence desire to avoid price competition---Such actions reduce their profits or they may come about because of deliberate collusion between suppliers to fix prices that maximize their joint profits---Conscious parallelism is a term used in competition law to describe pricing strategies among competitors in an oligopoly that occurs without an actual agreement between players---One competitor takes lead in raising and lowering prices whereas others then follow suit raising or lowering their prices by same amount with understanding that greater profits result---Such practice can be harmful to consumers who, if market power of firm is used, can be forced to pay monopoly prices for goods that should be selling for only a little more than cost of production---Parallelism is very hard to be prosecuted because it may occur without any collusion between competitors---No violation of anti-trust laws occurs where firms independently raise or lower prices but that a violation can be shown when 'plus factors' occur, such as firms being motivated to collude and taking actions against their own economic interests. Valspar Corporation and Valspar Sourcing, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, (873 F.3d 185 rel. (b) Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----S. 3(3)---Price discrimination---Term 'plus factors'---Applicability---Term 'plus factors' refers to economic circumstantial evidence of collusion above and beyond parallel movement of prices by firms in an industry---Plus factors are economic criteria that can assist with diagnosis of collusion. Re: Baby Food Antitrust litigation 166 F.3d 112 rel. (c) Competition Act (XIX of 2010)--- ----Ss. 2, 4, 30 & 34---Drugs Act (XXXI of 1976), S. 12---Show cause notice---Anti-competitive practices---Parallel pricing---Plus Factors---Pharma Bureau of Overseas Investors was issued show cause notice for price increase of various medicines by sharing…
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