livelawpk.com - The Competition Commission of Pakistan, as a Statutory ---

The Competition Commission of Pakistan, as a Statutory Body, is empowered to make determinations within its Domain; the Judicial Intervention in such matters should be minimal unless there is Clear Evidence of Illegality --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

1 month, 2 weeks
83

Islamabad 08-11-2024: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dismissed a Writ Petition filed by M/s Strawberry Sports Management (Private) Limited against the Pakistan Hockey Federation (PHF) and the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP). The petitioner challenged PHF’s refusal to provide a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for organizing a junior hockey league, alleging abuse of dominant position and unfair treatment under Pakistan’s competition laws.

Mr. Justice Babar Sattar, in a detailed ruling, addressed key issues regarding the regulatory discretion of CCP, the statutory obligations of PHF, and the applicability of constitutional rights to fair process. The Court found that the CCP’s Inquiry Report, which dismissed Strawberry Sports Management’s complaint, was lawful and conducted within CCP’s regulatory discretion. The Court noted that the CCP, as a competition regulator, holds authority to conduct preliminary inquiries and make decisions without full adjudicatory procedures.

The Court upheld CCP’s right to exercise regulatory discretion under Section 37 of the Competition Act, 2010. The CCP had determined, through its preliminary inquiry, that PHF’s refusal to grant an NOC did not constitute abuse of dominance or a refusal to deal, as PHF held no statutory obligation to provide such permission.

The petitioner argued that CCP’s preliminary findings should be appealable under Section 41 of the Act. However, the Court clarified that appeal rights are limited to formal regulatory orders and not to CCP’s preliminary opinions or inquiry reports.

Addressing the main claim of abuse of dominance, the Court concluded that PHF’s actions did not constitute anti-competitive behavior, as it was not legally required to issue NOCs for commercial sporting events. The Court also supported CCP’s stance that there is no existing market for a junior hockey league in Pakistan, thus negating any claim of market restriction or abuse.

The petitioner claimed a violation of Article 10A of the Constitution (right to fair trial and due process). However, the Court held that Article 10A primarily applies to parties directly impacted by regulatory actions, not to complainants. The Court noted that Strawberry Sports Management had adequate opportunity to present its case to CCP, which met due process standards.

Mr. Justice Babar Sattar emphasized the need for judicial restraint in reviewing regulatory matters, particularly in specialized areas like competition law. The Court affirmed that CCP, as a statutory body, is empowered to make determinations within its domain and that judicial intervention should be minimal unless there is clear evidence of illegality.