Shweta Shroff Chopra

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Lawyer/Attorney>Partner

Shweta Shroff Chopra is a partner in the firm’s competition law practice and has been practising competition law since its early days, having been involved in several high profile enforcement cases including the seminal CCI v Steel Authority of India case. Shweta has extensive experience in competition law issues in financial services markets, cement, construction, chemicals, natural resources (coal, oil & gas, potash, etc), pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, and other manufacturing industries. Recently, she successfully defended Apollo Tyres Limited in the tyre cartelisation case and Vodafone India Limited on an abuse of dominance and anti-competitive tie-in case. In 2011, Shweta worked closely with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the CCI in the finalisation of the Indian merger control regime, and last year, among others, secured an unconditional merger clearance from the CCI for Nestlé’s acquisition of Pfizer Inc’s global nutrition business. In 2012, she assisted Mrs Pallavi Shroff on the National Competition Policy Committee in relation to the introduction of the National Competition Policy and amendments to the Competition Act.

Linked authors

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (New Delhi)
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (Mumbai)

Articles

1505 Bulletin

Aparna Mehra, Gauri Chhabra, Harman Singh Sandhu, John Handoll, Manika Brar, Naval Satarawala Chopra, Pallavi Shroff, Shweta Shroff Chopra The Indian Competition Authority holds that information exchange is not a standalone violation of the Indian Competition Act (Flashlights cartel)

141

On 6 November 2018, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) found that four manufacturers/traders of flashlights and their trade association (the Opposite Parties) were not involved in cartelisation as, despite an information exchange, there was not enough corroborating evidence to suggest a (...)

Aparna Mehra, Gauri Chhabra, Harman Singh Sandhu, John Handoll, Manika Brar, Naval Satarawala Chopra, Pallavi Shroff, Shweta Shroff Chopra The Indian Competition Authority conditionally clears a merger in the agrochemicals and seeds industry (Bayer / Monsanto)

473

In an order dated 14 June 2018, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) approved Bayer AG’s (Bayer) acquisition of Monsanto Company (Monsanto) (together, the Parties) subject to certain modifications. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. represented Monsanto and assisted in seeking the CCI’s (...)

Naval Satarawala Chopra, Pallavi Shroff, Shweta Shroff Chopra The Competition Commission of India grants a 75% reduction in penalty in a cartel case applying leniency program (Suo Moto Case)

275

Introduction The Competition Commission of India (CCI) in the first ever decision involving leniency in a cartel case (Suo Moto Case No. 03 of 2014 – In Re: Cartelization in respect of tenders floated by Indian Railways for supply of Brushless DC Fans and other electrical items), published on (...)

Naval Satarawala Chopra, Pallavi Shroff, Shweta Shroff Chopra The Indian Government publishes notifications enhancing the existing jurisdictional thresholds in the merger control regime amending the existing exemptions

77

The Indian merger control regime under the Competition Act, 2002 (Competition Act) has been in force for nearly five years. The provisions of the Competition Act are to be read together with the notifications issued, from time to time, by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India (...)

Naval Satarawala Chopra, Pallavi Shroff, Shweta Shroff Chopra The Competition Commission of India fines an undertaking for failing to notify a merger within 30 days of the trigger date (GE)

133

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has recently imposed a penalty of INR 5 crores (approximately USD 750,000) on GE for its failure to notify the proposed acquisition of Alstom companies within 30 days of the trigger date. The penalty imposed on GE is the highest penalty for late filing (...)

Shweta Shroff Chopra The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal dismisses appeals filed by ten explosives manufacturers against the Competition Commission’s order finding them guilty of bid-rigging, but reduced the penalty imposed by 90% (Gulf Oil Corporation)

129

SUMMARY The Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) dismissed the appeals filed by ten explosives manufacturers against the order of 16 April 2012 made by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) (the CCI Order), finding them guilty of bid-rigging. The COMPAT held that the collective boycott (...)

Shweta Shroff Chopra The Competition Commission of India finds that ten explosives manufacturers had collectively boycotted an electronic reverse auction for the procurement of explosives (Coal India)

75

SUMMARY In the Explosives Case, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) found that ten explosives manufacturers had collectively boycotted an electronic reverse auction conducted by Coal India Limited (CIL) for the procurement of bulk loading and cartridge explosives in breach of Section 3 (...)

Send a message