LAW5809 Competition Law — Unit 4: Anti-Competitive Practices and Their Control

🔒 This unit is part of the complete package (Rs 300) — with the full notes of every unit, the prescribed cases and model questions.
✅ Unit 1 of this subject is free to read: open Unit 1 → · 🛒 order the package →

⚠️ AI-assisted notes — please read before you buy. These paid notes are prepared with the help of Artificial Intelligence and then reviewed by us. They are a study aid only — not a replacement for your prescribed textbook, the official TU syllabus or your own teacher, and we cannot guarantee that every citation, section number or case reference is error-free. No refund is possible once the PDF has been delivered, so please buy at your own risk. Read the free Unit 1 of your subject first and judge the quality yourself — place an order only if you understand and accept this.

Unit 4: Anti-Competitive Practices and Their Control

4.1 Definition and Types of Anti-Competitive Practices

Anti-competitive practices are conducts that distort, prevent, or restrict competition — by agreement (rivals conspiring), by unilateral exclusion (dominance abused), or by combination (mergers ending the contest). The 2063 Act’s prohibitions follow this typology (with the thresholds the Act and its notifications fix).

4.1.1 Cartels and Collusion

The horizontal conspiracy: price fixing, output quotas, market sharing, bid suppression — the per se core worldwide. Detection’s twin tools: leniency (the first confessor walks — the cartel’s own members turned informants) and screening (screening procurement bids for patterns — the ” bid-rigging algorithm” of flags: identical bids, rotation, suspicious margins). Nepal’s procurement context makes bid-rigging the live frontier (the Public Procurement Act’s interface).

4.1.2 Abuse of Dominant Position

Dominance itself is lawful; its abuse is not. The classical catalogue: unfair prices or terms (exploitative); predatory pricing (selling below cost to kill, recouping later); refusal to deal and discrimination; margin squeeze (wholesale priced to choke the retail rival); exclusivity and loyalty rebates (the Intel/Google pattern of the prescribed cases); tying and bundling (the Microsoft line).
The exam formula: dominance (within the defined market) + abusive conduct + effect on competition = violation. The defences: objective justification (cost, quality, safety) — the dominant firm’s burden to explain.

4.1.3 Price Fixing and Bid Rigging

4.1.4 Black Marketing and Exclusive Dealings

Black marketing (the Nepal-signature practice): hoarding, artificial scarcity, sale above controlled price — the 2063 Act’s market-protection face (with the Essential Commodities-type controls and the Black-marketing-type offence regime as the neighbouring statutes). Exclusive dealings

This is a preview. The complete Competition Law notes — full unit, Exam Focus box and model questions — are in the PDF / full version. Get the complete notes →