| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 651 2010 SLD 651 2010 CLD 1339 |
File No. 9/M(A&R) / CAA-TAAP / CCP/ 2007 decided on 29-01-2010
MESSRS TAKAFUL PAKISTAN LIMITED AND TRAVEL AGENT ASSOCIATION OF PAKISTAN
Law:
Section:
(a) Competition Ordinance (XLVI of 2009)--Ss. 3, 4, 10, 30 & 37---Competition (General Enforcement) Regulations, 2007, Regln. 16---Abusing of dominant position, entering into prohibited agreement and deceptive marketing practices---Imposition of penalty---Competition Commission took cognizance of agreement entered into by Travel Agent Association of Pakistan/TAAP with a company whereby Association introduced an insurance product which comprised: Default insurance plan for travel agents; and passengers' travel insurance at a premium of Rs.300 for domestic ticket and Rs.600 for international ticket---Competition Commission exercising its powers under S.37 of the Competition Ordinance, 2009 and Regln. 16 of Competition (General Enforcement) Regulations, 2007 proceeded with the inquiry and constituted Inquiry Committee, to inquire into the matter--Inquiry Committee in its report concluded that scheme under agreement, prima facie, was a trade restrictive agreement between Association and the Company violating S.4(2)(a)(g) which amounted to abuse of dominance in violation of S.3(3)(c)(d) of the Competition Ordinance, 2009 and that said agreement also appeared to constitute deceptive marketing practices by Company and Association in contravention of S.10(2)(a) of Competition Ordinance, 2009---Based on the recommendations made in the Inquiry Report, Competition Commission proceeded under S.30 of Competition Ordinance, 2009 and issued show-cause notices to both the undertakings---Section 3 of Competition Ordinance, 2009 prohibited tie-ins, which occurred when a seller refused to sell one product, which a buyer desired, unless the buyer also agreed to purchase a second product that the buyer would not otherwise wanted from seller on the offered term---Desired product was called the 'Tying' product; the other was the 'tied product'---To prove a claim for tying, the Commission set forth five elements test to be satisfied; (1) a tie existed between two distinct products; (2) the tying seller had dominant position in the tying product market so as to be able to prevent, restrict, reduce or distort competition in the tied product market; (3) coercion by the seller toβ¦
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