Case Law Details
Velankani Electronics Private Limited Vs Intel Corporation (Competition commission of India)
The OP has also argued that it has no incentive to deny access to anyone to the Server or Server-Board market segment. The OP’s interests are aligned to ensure multiple manufacturers of Server-Boards and Servers. Since the OP’s primary focus in the Server business is the sale of Micro-Processors, it is in the OP’s commercial interest to ensure that the market is replete with multiple manufacturers and suppliers of Server-Boards and Servers that use its Micro-Processors. In this regard, the Informant has submitted that abuse of dominance provisions under the Act do not insist on motive or intent on part of the dominant entity. The Informant can only establish the conduct of the OP. The intention/ motive behind the OP’s such conduct can only be explained by the OP and anyhow, this fact would not be relevant in the instant matter. The Commission in this regard is of the view that at this stage the Commission is not required to go into the intent or motive of the OP in indulging into the alleged conduct that has been, prima facie, found to be abusive. Otherwise also the language of Section 4 does not impose any such obligation on the Commission.
Based on the above analysis of the facts and materials presented by the Informant and the OP, the Commission is of the opinion that there exists a prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act by the OP in the matter. The Commission holds that the OP being in a dominant position in the market for “Processors for Servers in India” has, by refusing to provide access in a non-discriminatory manner to the complete set of files/ information necessary for the Informant to design its own Server-Boards which are compatible with the Micro-Processor manufactured by the OP, prima facie, denied market access to the Informant in contravention of Section 4 (2) (c) of the Act. Further, the OP through its conduct has also prima facie, limited and restricted the production of Servers and the market therefor and has also limited the technical/ scientific development relating to Servers in the market in violation of Section 4 (2) (b) of the Act. Consequently, the DG is directed to cause an investigation into the matter to ascertain whether the OP has abused its dominant position in contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act by denying to the Informant access to its reference design files for Server-Boards and/ or simulation files for the same, in a discriminatory manner, not at par with the ODMs/ OEMs, without any reasonable justification for the same.
It is made clear that, if during the course of the investigation, the DG comes across any other anti-competitive conduct of the OP in addition to that mentioned in the present order, the DG shall be at liberty to investigate the same as well.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER UNDER SECTION 26 (1) OF COMPETITION ACT, 2002
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
