by LegitPro Associates | Jul 11, 2023 | Competition Law, Knowledge Series, Startup
The CCI may ask the iPhone company to make changes to its app store billing and commission policies, as it has done in the case of Google, experts said. That would require Apple to open the ‘walled garden’, its closely guarded iOS operating system, something that the world’s most valuable company has not had to do anywhere in the world.
After its order against Google on 25th October 2022, probe against Apple is already completed and at the review stage after CCI got a new chairperson recently. Investigations into cases relating to Amazon, Meta, Swiggy, Zomato, Google, and news publishers are also in advanced stages, it is learned.
Almost for a decade all these Big Tech companies enjoyed free ride in India as far the question of abuse of Dominant position is concerned. They formed the policies, payment methods and collaborations at their own will without facing any challenge from regulatory body.
All of sudden, in last 3 years CCI started probe and order against Google was treated like landmark decision which imposed Rs. 1337 Crore fine and directing Google to allow third-party billing systems for payment on its app store and not limit the option for users to Google Play’s billing system (GPBS). Even, NCLT uphold the decision of CCI. Earlier, The Competition Commission of India (CCI) recently held the e-hospitality platform giants
MakeMyTrip- Go Ibibo and Oyo guilty of unfair trade practices. It imposed a combined pecuniary sanction of $47 million along with behavioural sanctions.
Now, probe against Apple’s app store billing and policies under review and the parties involved in the case will be called next to make their submission. The findings of the probe and the stand of the CCI are likely to be in line with the order against Google. If the CCI insists that Apple allow alternative payment methods to co-exist on its app store, then Apple ‘walled garden’ crumbles for sure. Amazon case is even more serious in nature as its directly/indirectly impacts lakhs of sellers specially domestic sellers.
After Google, Apple & Amazon, next in line are Meta, Swiggy, Zomato etc. and its seems like CCI first want to tame the Big Foreign Tech Companies and then home grown Unicorns are going to face the music. CCI’s evolving position on data-driven digital markets needs further analysis and more defined regulatory framework.
Quantum of Penalty & Relevant Turnover:
As per the provision, CCI has a discretion to impose a penalty with a quantum anywhere between 0-10 percent of the turnover. Wherein a cap of 10 percent has been imposed to keep a check on the powers of the CCI as well.
In the Excel Corp Care vs CCI case, the Supreme Court had held that the penalty under competition laws be stipulated on the basis of the ‘relevant turnover’ — turnover from the business engaged in violating conduct in the case of multi-product companies.
Moreover, CCI itself in the case of Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh vs Flipkart & Ors., and Lifestyle Equities C.V. vs Amazon noted that different segments of e-commerce platforms offer different dynamics and cannot be equated. It opined that while revenue segmentation is more appropriate in brick-and-mortar businesses, the integrated nature of multiple products and services offered over online platforms makes the relevant turnover rule ill-suited for digital platforms, exempting them from Supreme Court’s rule. It would thus be interesting to see how the appellate forums deal
with this issue, given that the regulator’s decision contradicts the apex court.
Conclusion:
Global developments witnessed in the past few years have led to a paradigm shift in the market dynamics. This shift has been propelled by thriving e-commerce model, evolving digital technologies, emerging new age markets and emergence of new business models. Well defined provision of law, clear guidance by the regulator, certainty in interpretation of the law and predictability of outcomes will surely secure the interest of all stakeholders in the competition regime.
by LegitPro Associates | Jun 28, 2023 | Knowledge Series, Startup
The legal industry in India has been witnessing a significant transformation with the increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools. These tools are revolutionizing various aspects of legal practice – changing the way legal professionals work, enabling them to navigate through vast amounts of data more efficiently. Such tools employ natural language processing (NLP) algorithms to extract relevant information quickly and accurately, significantly reducing the time and effort traditionally required for legal research and reading.
The most relevant and inspirational example of use of such tools is the deployment of AI- transcribers in several Constitution Bench proceedings before the Supreme Court of India. On 21st February 2023, Chief Justice of India Justice DY Chandrachud announced that the Supreme Court would be publishing live transcriptions of all constitution bench proceedings using A.I. transcribers. Needless to say, this is a monumental step for an industry that is otherwise known to be fairly traditional with its processes and procedures. This step by the judiciary sets a significant precedent to be adopted by other courts within the country, as transcribing proceedings is a labor-intensive and time-consuming process. With the integration of AI transcribers, however, this task becomes significantly more efficient. AI transcribers leverage advanced speech recognition algorithms and machine learning techniques to convert spoken words into text in real-time. This enables faster and more accurate transcription of court proceedings, saving valuable time for all those involved.
Now while AI transcribers offer significant advantages, they obviously have certain drawbacks. One limitation is their dependence on audio quality. Background noise, poor audio recording, or overlapping voices can affect the accuracy of transcriptions, which is an accurate description of any court proceedings! Additionally, the most significant drawback is the inability of such transcribers to accurately understand accents, dialects, or speakers with unique speech patterns, resulting in higher error rates. This is especially the case in a country like India where proceedings of several courts are conducted in regional languages, making the use of AI transcribers redundant. Furthermore, the contextual understanding of AI transcribers is still limited, making it challenging to accurately capture complex legal or technical terminology. Lastly, the risk of privacy breaches exists when sensitive or confidential information is transcribed and stored by AI systems. Striking a balance between convenience and ensuring data security remains a challenge in the adoption of AI transcribers.
It is of course important to acknowledge that these limitations are not inherent deficiencies of AI itself, but challenges in its development and application. AI transcribers continuously learn and improve, as that is the nature of all artificial intelligence. Feedback loops and user interactions help refine the algorithms and language models, resulting in better accuracy over time. Interestingly, the only way to teach AI to work for you is to learn to use it more efficiently!
There is of the argument that employing AI transcribers would cause a massive loss of jobs across the board. While this may be somewhat true, there can be no replacement for human intelligence, reasoning, critical thinking, and analysis. AI tools are meant to augment legal professionals’ capabilities, and not replace them entirely.
The Supreme Court’s integration of AI transcribers in court proceedings exemplifies the transformative impact of AI in the legal industry. By automating the transcription process, AI tools enable greater efficiency, accuracy, and accessibility in the judicial system. While challenges remain, the utilization of AI transcribers in the Supreme Court signals a progressive approach towards leveraging technology to enhance the administration of justice in India.
by LegitPro Associates | Jun 23, 2023 | Knowledge Series, Real Estate
Eminent domain is the authority of the government. to confiscate private property for public use in exchange for reasonable compensation to the property owner. The Fifth Amendment to the United States offers Constitution provides that private property cannot be seized for public purposes without reasonable compensation.
Eminent domain is a complex legal process that entails balancing public requirements with property owners’ rights. It is critical for property owners to understand their rights, consult with eminent domain legal professionals, and ensure that their interests are adequately protected throughout the process.
EMINENT DOMAIN IN INDIA
Eminent domain is a constitutional right guaranteed to the government under Article 300A of the Indian Constitution in the Indian legal system. This enables the government to purchase private land for public use at the national as well as state levels. This power is subject to specific constraints and safeguards that safeguard property owners’ rights.
Eminent domain is restricted to public use, including infrastructure development, urban planning, public utilities, defence, and other activities that benefit people in general. The government must demonstrate that the purchase is both essential and in the public’s best interests. When private property is acquired, property owners have the right to just and equitable reimbursement under the Indian Constitution. The compensation is determined by variables such as the property’s market value, location, achievable use, and any modifications made to the property. In the exercise of eminent domain, due process and fair procedures must be adhered to. Property owners are notified of the government’s intention to buy their property, offered the opportunity to be heard, and the ability to contest the acquisition. Property owners who think their rights have been infringed or there were discrepancies during the purchase process might seek judicial review.
The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) is the major piece of law controlling eminent domain in India. The act outlines the framework for land acquisition, compensation determination, and affected people’s rights. Furthermore, the legislation includes procedures for conducting social impact research studies to analyse the repercussions of land acquisition and demands for rehabilitation and relocation for impacted persons and communities.
KEY COMPONENTS OF EMINENT DOMAIN
Let’s go through the essential components of eminent domain in depth, using depictions to help you understand:
One of the core concepts of eminent domain is that the government can only use this authority for a public purpose. This means that the acquisition of private property must benefit the community as a whole. For example, the government may purchase property to build a new public school, enlarge a roadway to relieve traffic congestion, or create a public park for recreational purposes.
An additional significant aspect of eminent domain is the necessity to compensate property owners whose land is being taken. The fair market value of the property at the time of purchase is used to assess just compensation. It should accurately reflect the property’s worth, including its current usage, development possibilities, and any distinguishing features that influence its value.
For example, if the government buys a commercial building in a busy downtown area to make way for a public transportation project, it must pay the property owner an amount that reflects the property’s market value, taking into account its prime location and income-generating potential.
Property owners retain the right to due process when their property is taken via eminent domain. This includes obtaining adequate notice of the government’s intention to seize the property, having the chance to raise their objections or concerns, and having the right to be heard in a fair and impartial hearing. Property owners should be given enough time and information to comprehend the procedure and exercise their rights.
Let’s see an example where the government want to build an irrigation canal on the farmland. In that situation, Prior to purchasing farmland for the building of an irrigation canal, the government must notify the landowner of its plan, offer project information, organise discussions, and take into account any objections voiced by the affected party during the acquisition process.
Additionally, property owners have the ability to seek judicial review if they feel the government’s eminent domain exercise breaches their rights or if there are procedural flaws. This permits people to raise a legal challenge to the acquisition and have an unbiased authority to assess the legality and fairness of the government’s actions. The court can decide if the purchase was warranted, whether the compensation paid was fair, and whether any legal criteria were satisfied.
For example, If a property owner thinks that the government’s acquisition of their land for a proposed shopping mall does not serve a real public purpose or that the compensation granted is insufficient, they can file a lawsuit contesting the acquisition and demanding a review of the government’s conduct.
While eminent domain provides the government authority, it is not without constraints. The government must show that the taking is necessary, reasonable, and serves a valid public purpose. Property owners’ rights are balanced against community needs, ensuring that private property is not unjustly infringed upon and that the public interest is appropriately met.
For example, if the government attempts to acquire a historically significant property in order to demolish it for the construction of a shopping centre, a court may rule that the public interest is not adequately served because preserving the property’s historical value outweighs the proposed commercial development.
In the end, eminent domain is a legal authority granted to the government that enables it to take private land for public purposes. It is a complicated concept with various crucial features that must be properly addressed and handled in order to preserve property owners’ rights. While the government has the ability to use eminent domain, it is limited by requirements such as a valid public purpose and the responsibility to give reasonable compensation. Due process, notification, and judicial review further protect property owners’ rights and guarantee a fair and transparent procedure. Balancing the public interest with private property rights is critical in the exercise of eminent domain, with the goal of achieving harmonious community growth while adhering to the values of justice and fairness. Understanding and protecting the key elements of eminent domain serves as essential for maintaining a balanced legal system that respects property owners’ rights while also serving the best interests of the public at large.
