Time is ripe for private damage actions

PAYAL MALIK, LUKE STREATFEILD, DEMICA KAUR NETTLEFORD & RAM TAMARAPPOO| Respectively senior advisor, Econ One and ICRIER Prosus Centre; partner, Hausfeld & Co LLP; associate, Hausfeld & Co LLP; and consultant, Econ One

- Respectively senior advisor, Econ One and ICRIER Prosus Centre; partner, Hausfeld & Co LLP; associate, Hausfeld & Co LLP; and consultant, Econ One

IT'S BEEN MORE than three decades since India replaced a command-and-control mode of governance relying on state ownership of the means of production with a new mode of governance where private sector participation in economic activity is governed by the rule of law and independent regulation.

While independent regulatory bodies are entrusted with the statutory mandate of sectoral governance in areas perceived to be at greater risk of market failures, such as telecoms, oil and gas, ports, and airports, an economy-wide market regulator, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), has supplemented these regulatory institutions to make markets function better and provide the necessary "entrepreneurial freedom" to fuel economic growth.

On the back of these economic and institutional reforms, thus far, India is poised to become the third largest economy in the world. With balanced regulatory oversight and stakeholder engagement, a strong regulatory foundation can unleash the potential of industry and preserve the appropriate incentives for investment and innovation.

The enforcement of competition law—to combat anti-competitive agreements, anti-competitive mergers, and abuse of market power—provides the ground rules of a market economy. Anti-competitive conduct affects the process of competition—how competition unfolds in the market—and as a result causes harm to competitors and consumers.