<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday confirmed the Competition Commission of India's rejection of complaints alleging cartelisation and anti-competitive practices by cab aggregators Uber and Ola.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices R F Nariman, K M Joseph and Krishna Murari dismissed an appeal against the NCLAT's order of May 29, 2020.</p>.<p>Both the CCI and the NCLAT found that Ola and Uber do not facilitate cartelisation or anti-competitive practices between drivers, who are independent individuals.</p>.<p>The CCI had noted that a rider books a raid at any given time which is accepted by an anonymous driver available in the area, and there is no opportunity for the driver to coordinate with other drivers. </p>.<p>"This cannot be termed as a cartel activity/conduct through Ola/Uber’s platform," it had said.</p>.<p>The top court rejected preliminary objections against filing a case before the CCI and NCLAT by Samir Agrawal.</p>.<p>"When the CCI performs inquisitorial, as opposed to adjudicatory functions, the doors of approaching the CCI and the appellate authority, i.e., the NCLAT, must be kept wide open in the public interest, so as to subserve the high public purpose of the Act," the court said. </p>.<p>In 2018, Agrawal asked the CCI to initiate an inquiry against Ola and Uber alleging that they entered into price-fixing agreements in contravention of section 3(1) read with section 3(3)(a) of the Competition Act. </p>.<p>He claimed Uber and Ola calculated the fare by an algorithm based on many factors. Due to algorithmic-based pricing, neither are riders able to negotiate fares with individual drivers nor are the drivers able to offer any discounts.</p>.<p>The CCI, however, said that the algorithmically determined pricing for each rider and each trip tends to be different owing to the interplay of large data sets.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday confirmed the Competition Commission of India's rejection of complaints alleging cartelisation and anti-competitive practices by cab aggregators Uber and Ola.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices R F Nariman, K M Joseph and Krishna Murari dismissed an appeal against the NCLAT's order of May 29, 2020.</p>.<p>Both the CCI and the NCLAT found that Ola and Uber do not facilitate cartelisation or anti-competitive practices between drivers, who are independent individuals.</p>.<p>The CCI had noted that a rider books a raid at any given time which is accepted by an anonymous driver available in the area, and there is no opportunity for the driver to coordinate with other drivers. </p>.<p>"This cannot be termed as a cartel activity/conduct through Ola/Uber’s platform," it had said.</p>.<p>The top court rejected preliminary objections against filing a case before the CCI and NCLAT by Samir Agrawal.</p>.<p>"When the CCI performs inquisitorial, as opposed to adjudicatory functions, the doors of approaching the CCI and the appellate authority, i.e., the NCLAT, must be kept wide open in the public interest, so as to subserve the high public purpose of the Act," the court said. </p>.<p>In 2018, Agrawal asked the CCI to initiate an inquiry against Ola and Uber alleging that they entered into price-fixing agreements in contravention of section 3(1) read with section 3(3)(a) of the Competition Act. </p>.<p>He claimed Uber and Ola calculated the fare by an algorithm based on many factors. Due to algorithmic-based pricing, neither are riders able to negotiate fares with individual drivers nor are the drivers able to offer any discounts.</p>.<p>The CCI, however, said that the algorithmically determined pricing for each rider and each trip tends to be different owing to the interplay of large data sets.</p>
