Compat sets aside Rs 64 cr fine on GlaxosmithKline, Sanofi

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Nov 08 2016 | 6:22 PM IST
Competition Appellate Tribunal today set aside penalties totalling Rs 64 crore imposed by CCI on drugmakers GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi Pasteur India, saying that these are "legally unsustainable".
Besides, the tribunal has restrained the Competition Commission of India (CCI) from imposing penalty on the officials of these companies, who have been held responsible for contravention of Competition Act.
The tribunal's order comes more than a year after the CCI had slapped Rs 64 crore fine on the two firms for alleged collusive bidding in supply of a meningitis vaccine to the government for Haj pilgrims.
The matter relates to supply of polysaccharide Quadrivalent Meningococcal Meningitis (QMMV).
In a 146-page order today, Compat said there is no evidence direct or indirect of any meeting between the two firms and the bids given by them were not identical as the quantity quoted by them were different.
The prices quoted by GSK and Sanofi were also different, the tribunal noted.
Further, Compat observed that CCI ought to have taken into consideration the appellants' turnover of QMMV vaccine imported for preceding three financial years.
"Even if we were to assume that the Commission had taken a deliberate decision to impose penalty at three per cent of the turnover of the appellants based on the financial statements filed by them, the same is legally unsustainable because the Commission has taken into consideration the entire turnover of the appellants of which QMMV is a miniscule fraction," the tribunal said.
This tribunal has repeatedly held that while imposing penalty under Section 27(b) of Competition Act, CCI can take into consideration turnover of the relevant product and not the entire turnover of industry/enterprise, the order noted.
In June 2016, the watchdog had imposed a fine of Rs 60.45 crore on GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Rs 3.04 crore on Sanofi as well as directed them to cease and desist" from anti- competitive practices.
The quantum of penalties amounted to the respective 3 per cent of their three-year average turnover. The turnover figures for the financial years 2008, 2009 and 2010 were taken into account.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Nov 08 2016 | 6:22 PM IST

Next Story