Exclusive Motors Pvt. Limited v. Automobili Lamborghini S.P.A.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Competition Commission examined an information alleging anti-competitive practices by Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. The Commission held that agreements within a single economic entity do not fall under Section 3, the opposite party was not dominant in the super sports car market, and no prima facie case existed. The matter was closed under Section 26(2).
What did the court decide?
The Information is closed under Section 26(2) of the Act as there is no prima facie case.
What the court decided
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Case No. 52 of 2012
Dated: 06/11/2012
IN THE MATTER OF: Exclusive Motors Pvt. Limited Informant v. Automobili Lamborghini S.P.A. Opposite Party
ORDER UNDER SECTION 26(2) OF THE COMPETITION ACT, 2002
The present information has been filed by Exclusive Motors Pvt. Limited (‘the informant’) under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘the Act’) against Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. (‘the opposite party’) alleging inter-alia contravention of Section 3 and Section 4 of the Act.
- The informant claimed to be in the business of importing and selling of ‘Super Sports Cars’ in the territory of Delhi. The opposite party is well known manufacturer of Super Sports Cars. The opposite party is the subsidiary of Audi Ag which in turn is a part of Volkswagen group. Volkswagen group is stated to own majority of luxury car brands such as Audi, SEAT, Lamborghini, Volkswagen, Skoda, Bentley, Bugatti and Porsche.
- Briefly stated, the informant alleged that it was appointed as the importer and dealer of Super Sports Cars manufactured by the opposite party in 2005 by way of a Dealership Agreement. Thereafter, the informant invested substantial time, efforts and money to develop Indian market for opposite party’s cars which was negligible prior to this agreement. Sometime in 2011, the opposite party appointed its own group company, Volkswagen Group Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Volkswagen India) as exclusive importer of opposite party’s cars and the informant was requested (through a letter dated 24.01.2012) to terminate the existing dealership agreement with the opposite party and to bring in place a fresh dealership agreement with Volkswagen India. The new agreement entailed a larger deposit amount and the notice period required for termination was sought to be
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an agreement between a company and its group company constitutes an agreement under Section 3 of the Competition Act.
Whether the opposite party holds a dominant position in the market for super sports cars in India.
Whether the opposite party abused its dominant position by discriminatory pricing or denying market access.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Exclusive Motors Pvt. Limited
- respondent
Automobili Lamborghini S.P.A
Coram
H.C. Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court