Vikas Kathuria

University of Tilburg - Center for Law and Economics (TILEC), Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition (Munich)
PhD candidate / Research Fellow

Vikas Kathuria is currently pursuing a PhD at Tilburg University. Vikas Kathuria is also Assistant Professor at Jindal Global Law School (JGLS), India. He has a B.A., LL.B. from the University of Delhi and an LL.M from London School of Economics and Political Science. Prior to joining JGLS, Vikas Kathuria was working with Consumer Unity and Trust Society (CUTS) International, a think tank, as Assistant Policy Analyst on issues pertaining to Competition policy and law, Economic Regulations and Consumer Protection. His previous experience includes working with PEC (Project-Equipment-Commodities) Ltd., a Public Sector Undertaking under Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India as Management Trainee (Legal). The areas of work primarily related to Trade Laws, Commercial Laws, Negotiable Instruments, Maritime Law and Civil Laws. Vikas Kathuria’ s research interests include Competition Law, Financial Law and Policy, and Financial Regulations.


892 Bulletin

Vikas Kathuria The Indian Competition Authority orders investigation against Swedish telecom provider for abusing its dominant position in determining royalty under FRAND terms (Micromax Informatics / Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson)


Background In a recent matter, Micromax Informatics Limited vs Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ), the Competition Commission of India has ordered an investigation by DG competition against Ericsson for abusing its dominant position in determining royalty under the FRAND terms. Micromax in (...)

Vikas Kathuria The Indian Competition Authority finds no anti-competitive effect of exclusive distribution agreement that conferred monopoly in the aftermarket for medical equipment warranty services (Dr. Anoop Bhagat / Spectra Medical System India and Solta Medicals)


Background The Competition Commission of India in a recent matter found that allegations regarding Exclusive Distribution Agreement and Abuse of Dominant Position were not true and thus rejected the matter out rightly finding not even a prima facie case. However, the merit of the complaint did (...)

Send a message