I. Introduction 1. On 24 September 2018, the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (“CCCS”) issued its infringement decision on the merger between Grab and Uber (“Grab/Uber merger”). This is the first infringement decision [1] issued against an anti-competitive merger since the prohibition under section 54 of the Competition Act (Cap. 50B) (“the Act”) (the “Section 54 Prohibition”) came into force on 1 July 2007. In its infringement decision, the CCCS levied financial penalties totalling approximately S$13 million ( €8.44 million) on Grab and Uber, and issued directions to remedy the substantial lessening of competition caused by the merger. 2. This is also the first time the CCCS used its powers to issue interim measures directions [2] under section 67(1A) of the Act. During the
|
INTERNATIONAL: SINGAPORE - COMPETITION AUTHORITY - MERGERS CONTROL - INFRINGEMENT DECISION - INTERIM MEASURES
Singapore: Grab/Uber merger – Observations from the CCCS’s first interim measures directions and merger infringement decisions
In September 2018, the CCCS (Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore) issued its infringement decision on the merger between Grab and Uber, the first merger infringement decision issued by the authority since the prohibition came into force in July 2007. This was also the first case in which the CCCS issued interim measures directions on the parties soon after commencing its investigations. We set out six key observations arising from CCCS’s investigation of this merger, set against the backdrop of the merger control regime in Singapore, and provide some views on how this would impact future investigations.
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
