We welcome you all to the 12th edition of the NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition, 2021. Our spirit and enthusiasm for mooting has brought us back again even in the pandemic and this time, the competition is being conducted from 6th-14th March, spanning over 2 weekends.
We at NLU, Jodhpur believe that education unless and until complemented by intellectually invigorating challenges fails its purpose. Cognizant of this responsibility, we will ensure that this competition will help all participants hone their mooting skills along with exploring the nuances of competition law with an exciting and challenging proposition. The organizing team has left no stone unturned in their diligent endeavour to make this competition an enriching experience, this time virtually!
The Competition is being organized under the patronage of the Competition Commission of India, in association with Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas and our knowledge partners, SCC Online and Eastern Book Company. There are 36 participating teams from some of the most prominent law schools across the country to be adjudged by legal professionals and experts in the field of competition law. The competition is finally about to begin and we are here to keep you updated on everything. You can also follow us on Instagram (@mcc.nluj) and Facebook (NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition) for more insights.
DAY 1 –
10:00 am -Inaugural ceremony and exchange of memorials-
The 12th NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition has been inaugurated virtually in the presence of the Dean of Law, Dr. I.P. Massey, and the Chairperson of the Moot Court Committee, Mr. Rohan C. Thomas. With this, we start with the Competition.
11:00 AM: The participants’ queries have been answered and the exchange of memorials between the teams has taken place.
The Oral Arguments of the preliminary rounds will start from 1 PM where the teams will argue against each other from both sides of the problems, once. We wish the best of luck to all the teams!
Judges’ Briefing–
Briefing for judges for Preliminary rounds has been done, this time over email. The judges were mailed a comprehensive bench memorial and a brief version of the memorial prepared by the Moot Court Committee. The judges for the rounds are distinguished legal experts in their fields. Our esteemed judges are here to test the participating team’s knowledge and grip on the law. It is yet to be seen how the teams shall fare in arguing from both sides in these Preliminary (March 6th) and Reverse Preliminary Rounds (March 7th).
7:00 pm -END OF PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
The competition has taken off on full steam and we have just come to an end of our preliminary rounds. Tomorrow is another crucial day as the Reverse Preliminary Rounds will take place. Both these rounds decide which teams qualify and make it to the Top 16 teams or the Octa Finalists. We look forward to seeing the teams with higher energy and enthusiasm to showcase their talent and compete with each other tomorrow and wish them luck!
Day 2
11:50 am -Reverse Preliminary Rounds Slot 1-
All the teams are back on track with fresh energy and high spirits to present their arguments. The idea of the Reverse Preliminary rounds is to give every team an equal chance to present their best arguments from the other side, opposite to the one they have presented in their Preliminary Rounds. Slot 1 of Reverse Preliminary Rounds have just ended and we witnessed some impressive arguments and great mooting skills. Slot 2 of the rounds will begin soon. Our best wishes to all the participating teams.
3:00pm – Slot 2
The reverse preliminary rounds have been concluded. With great preparation from all the teams, Day 2 was as heated as the first day and the battle for the top 16 Octa Finalists now stands concluded. Participants await the results of these Rounds which shall be announced in due course in the coming week. We can’t wait to see what the next weekend holds for us! It was indeed a highly charged weekend where we witnessed teams from across the country coming together to demonstrate some excellent mooting skills and charge against each other with greatly nuanced and innovative legal arguments!
Stay tuned for the Octa Finalists (to be updated in the next week)!
The wait is finally over!
Here we present our top 16 teams that have qualified for the Octa Finals Round-
Chanakya National Law University
Christ University, Bangalore
Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow
Government Law College Mumbai
Gujarat National Law University
Indian Law Society’s Law College, Pune
National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad
National Law School of India University, Bengaluru
National Law University Delhi
National Law University Odisha
National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi
National Law Institute University, Bhopal
National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi.
O.P. Jindal Global University
Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab
Symbiosis Law School, Pune
The teams will receive memorials on 12th March 2021. We can’t wait to see what this weekend holds for these teams. Our best wishes to all the teams.
Day 3–
It’s a bright morning and the sixteen teams are ready and eager to fight it out in the Octa-finals of the 12th NLU Antitrust Law Moot Court Competition. The teams have had almost a week’s time to rest and prepare themselves and we look forward to some inspired rounds of mooting!
10 am- Octa Finals
And the rounds have begun! The judges and participants kick start the day with palpable enthusiasm. Which of these teams finally manage to impress enough to make it to the next round of the competition is something that we anxiously wait to find out!
Results-
Witnessing exemplary performances by all the teams, the Octa Finals reached its end! Here are the teams qualifying to the Quarters:
Chanakya National Law University
Christ University, Bangalore
Government Law College, Mumbai
National Law Institute University, Bhopal
National Law University, Odisha
National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi
National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi.
Symbiosis Law School, Pune
With last moment preparations and jitters, the teams are getting geared up to face the Quarters!
1:30 pm- Quarter Finals
With the trophy closer than ever before, the qualifying teams move ahead with gusto as the rounds for the Quarter Finals commence!
Results-
After a great effort from everybody involved, the teams that have made it to the Semi-Finals are:
National Law Institute University, Bhopal
National Law University, Odisha
Symbiosis Law School, Pune
School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore
5 pm- Semi-Finals
We have finally reached the last stop of the day. The “courtrooms” are charged with energy and anticipation as our judges take their seats to decide upon the fate of the last four standing teams! Despite the long day they’ve had, fatigue is barely reflected on the participants’ faces as they get ready to take on the last hurdle before Finals!
Results-
The wait is finally over! The two teams qualifying to the Finals are:
National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Symbiosis Law School, Pune
Tomorrow is going to be an exciting day with these two teams putting their best foot forward in a bid to take the trophy home!
Day 4-
FINALS
9:55 am– The competition is about to start. The judges try and make the teams be comfortable before the rounds by making conversation. In a few short and exciting hours, this year’s edition of the competition will reach its conclusion with one of these teams happily taking away the win!
10:10 am-The first speaker makes a confident start and is almost immediately met with a question by the panel. The initial bout of questions is regarding the jurisdiction of the Court over the matter. These are tackled skillfully and swiftly by the speaker! All three judges are actively engaging with the arguments and are prompt to test the knowledge of the participant!
10: 20 am– An extension of 15 minutes has been granted to the first speaker of the Appellant team.
10: 45 am– The second speaker has taken over and is pleading the second issue regarding Section 4 of the Competition Act. She alleges that the Company has abused its dominant position in the relevant markets. Her argument hinges on the fact that the alleged dominance is proven due to the government patronage and funding it enjoys and the fact that it enjoys superior technological prowess in the area. Few minutes into her arguments, a question is posed to her on why the aftermarket be considered as a relevant market in the present matter. The speaker approaches the questions calmly and answers them confidently.
11:00 am- The speaker is grilled on the definition of “sovereign function” and the source of the definition that the speaker provides. The speaker provides a catena of judgments that she has relied upon for the same.
11:11 am- The speaker is again asked questions about the jurisdictional power of the Competition Commission on looking into the actions of the DOTD in favouring a particular market player in the market. The speaker seems to be a little stumped on this issue but moves on to another aspect of the argument and tries to satisfy the judges. Despite facing some heat on this issue for a prolonged period of time, the speaker manages to maintain a calm approach.
11:24 am – Concluding their submissions, the Appellants submit their prayer.
11: 27 am- The first speaker of the Respondents starts her submissions. She will be addressing the issues relating to the anti-competitive agreements. The second speaker will be dealing with issues 2 and 3.
11: 35 am-The two-fold argument undertaken by the speaker in proving that there was no violation of Section 3(1) read with Section 3(4) is that firstly, there are no anti-competitive agreements between Vijeta and its authorized dealers and secondly, that any agreements entered into by the Respondent do not cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition as per the threshold of Section 19(3). She argues that the mere exchange of information and recommendation as has been done in the present matter does not conclusively prove the existence of an agreement. She cites the case of Film and Television Producers Guild v. Multiplex Association of India.
11: 45 am– The judges pose a myriad of practical and factual questions on the limitations placed by their agreements on the dealer that give their product an advantage and consequently have an adverse effect on the competition. These are answered by the counsel by reminding the panel of the “new entrant” status of their product and argues that this renders certain steps like the ones taken in favour of their product necessary for the product’s survival. She also cited cases that allowed such agreements that had a legitimate requirement of preservation of quality of the product in order to protect the “luxury image” of a product.
12: 05 pm– The second speaker seeks permission to address the judges. The first contention by the second speaker is that the relevant market defined by the appellants is wrong. A question is posed on predatory pricing. She argues that Vijeta is not dominant enough in any market in order to permeate the said dominance to any other market. She specifies that the pricing policy adopted is for promotional requirements. She argues that a 32% market share does not prove dominance and other factors such as the size and resources of the competitors have to be considered and that there is no predatory intent.
12:15 pm- The speaker moves on to the issue of warranty. She argues that warranty obligations are a common business practice. Vijeta has constructed a warranty policy in such a way that would take liability for any failure that happens due to its own actions. Mango mobiles, being the flagship product of Vijeta, is a very specialised product and any defect caused due to Vijeta’s own actions are guarded by the warranty. Actions that are taken by any unauthorized operators, however, are not covered under the warranty. Thus, the conditions are justified. The judges again steer her towards the issue of delineation of relevant market. She answers that the market should be considered as a unified market considering the insurance and warranty conditions and the reasonable shifting cost.
12:25 pm– The rebuttals and surrebuttals have been conducted and the judges are taking some time in gathering their thoughts and giving the finals scores. It was a rigorous and invigorating round, testing each participant’s understanding of the problem and the law. The teams are taking some much-deserved rest after the engaging session and eagerly waiting for the results!
15:27 pm– The moment is finally here! After months of research, practice, and hard work, the winning team gets to take it all! The Honorable Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Poonam Pradhan Saxena, is extremely delighted to announce the following winners:
Winning Team – (Team 5) Symbiosis Law School, Pune
Runners-Up Team – (Team 4) National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Best Student Advocate of the Preliminary Rounds – (Team 23) Ira Mahajan from P. Jindal Global University
Second Best Student Advocate of the Preliminary Rounds – (Team 16) Anjali Singh from Law Centre II, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi
Best Memorial – (Team 5) Symbiosis Law School, Pune
Best Student Advocate of the Final Rounds – (Team 5) Dhivya from Symbiosis Law School, Pune
This edition of the Anti-trust Moot Court Competition was like none other before! It had us tackling new challenges on almost every front, be it Logistics, PR, Tabs, or Registrations. The successful completion of the event feels surreal but at the same time, leaves us wishing we had the warm opportunity of hosting the judges and the teams on campus. It is something the entire Organizing Committee looks forward to the entire academic year. We especially express our gratitude to the judges and the teams for helping us conduct this event virtually. Hoping to be able to welcome the next set of teams to our lovely city next year for the coming edition of the Antitrust, this is us signing off!