{"id":196837,"date":"2018-06-11T17:43:52","date_gmt":"2018-06-11T12:13:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=196837"},"modified":"2018-08-18T17:55:28","modified_gmt":"2018-08-18T12:25:28","slug":"bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","title":{"rendered":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI"},"content":{"rendered":"

Competition Commission of India (CCI): <\/strong>The four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahta, and G.P. Mittal, Members, ordered closure of the matter filed against BMW India Private Limited (OP-1) under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging \u2018abuse of dominance\u2019.<\/p>\n

The brief facts of the matter state that \u2018Informant\u2019 was a dealer for selling BMW cars in the State of Gujarat and was continuing to be one for almost 9 years. The primary allegation which in accordance to the \u2018Informant\u2019 constitutes to \u2018abuse of dominant position\u2019 is that OP-1 abused their dominant position by selling their cars through dealers outside Gujarat to the customers based in the State of Gujarat. Another averment was that BMW India seems to have been carrying out a fraudulent\/illegal arrangement as no \u2018entry tax\u2019 is being paid on entering of the cars in the State of Gujarat from outside the State.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Commission on noting the stated allegations and facts, analysed the issue placed by the \u2018Informant\u2019 and concluded by stating that, BMW India had in advance, before the renewal of the agreement of dealership between the parties, sent a notice of \u2018non-renewal\u2019 which made the \u2018Informant\u2019 well aware of the expiry of the agreement and the fact that BMW India has negligible share in the passenger car segment in India clearly leads to BMW India not being a dominant player. Hence the Commission opined that nowhere OP-1 contravened Section 4 i.e \u2018abuse of dominant position\u2019\u00a0 and pronounced an order of closure under the provisions of Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002. [Prasoli Motor Works (P) Ltd. v. BMW India (P) Ltd.,2018 SCC OnLine CCI 39<\/b><\/a>, dated 30-05-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Competition Commission of India (CCI): The four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahta, and G.P. Mittal, <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":76441,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[3881,2998,30427,30429,30428],"class_list":["post-196837","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-abuse-of-dominance","tag-Agreement","tag-bmw","tag-dominant-player","tag-non-renewal"],"yoast_head":"\nBMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahta, and G.P. Mittal,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"headline\":\"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":297,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/10\\\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"abuse of dominance\",\"Agreement\",\"BMW\",\"dominant player\",\"non-renewal\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Tribunals\\\/Commissions\\\/Regulatory Bodies\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/\",\"name\":\"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/10\\\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/10\\\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/10\\\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"width\":1329,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2018\\\/06\\\/11\\\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_1\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI","og_description":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahta, and G.P. Mittal,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/"},"author":{"name":"Bhumika Indulia","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"headline":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI","datePublished":"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/"},"wordCount":297,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","keywords":["abuse of dominance","Agreement","BMW","dominant player","non-renewal"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","name":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","datePublished":"2018-06-11T12:13:52+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-18T12:25:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","width":1329,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/84c1b51748d0297cf12e5a898eccb7bd3eb5f0ab4ae8e275e2e65c4c83f84740?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196837","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=196837"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196837\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/76441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=196837"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=196837"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=196837"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}