Quick Updates — August 2026
QUICK UPDATES2026
Suhana Gupta, Second-Year, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) at WBNUJS
10/4/20267 min read
AUGUST 2026 UPDATES
CCI Fines Agro Input Trade Associations and Office-Bearers for Cartelisation
On 21 August 2026, the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) passed an order under Section 27 of the Competition Act, 2002 against the Agro Input Dealers Association (“AIDA”) and the Agro Input Welfare Association (“AIWA”) along with two individuals, Manmohan C. Kalantri and Arvindbhai Jerambhai Patel, in Case No. 06 of 2023. The Commission held that all four had acted in contravention of Section 3(3)(b) read with Section 3(1) of the Act by coordinating to limit or control the supply of agricultural inputs among the associations' members.
Under Section 27(a), the CCI directed both associations, as well as the individuals found personally liable under Section 48, AIDA's General Secretary, Pravinbhai Patel and its National Spokesperson, Sanjay Kumar Raghuwanshi, to cease and desist from the offending conduct. After weighing the nature and gravity of the contravention along with mitigating and aggravating factors, the Commission imposed monetary penalties of Rs. 81,889 on AIDA, Rs. 3,92,269 on AIWA, Rs. 4,98,903 on Kalantri, Rs. 74,717 on Patel, Rs. 9,177 on Pravinbhai Patel and Rs. 8,622 on Raghuwanshi.
Separately, invoking its non-monetary powers under Section 27(g), the Commission ordered both associations to organise a competition-compliance training programme for their members, to spread awareness of competition law and promote a compliance culture within the associations.
CCI Tightens Timeline Rules for Commitment Applications as IndiGo's Settlement Bid Over December Disruptions Awaits Decision
The Competition Commission of India’s (“CCI”) handling of IndiGo's bid to settle its abuse-of-dominance case moved forward in August 2026. First, the public comment window that the CCI had opened on IndiGo's commitment application in Case No. 44 of 2025 (Kartikeya Rawal v. InterGlobe Aviation Limited) closed on 13 August 2026 after stakeholders were invited to weigh in on whether the airline's proposed remedies adequately addressed the competition concerns raised by its conduct during the December 2025 flight disruptions. Second, on 18 August 2026, the CCI notified the Competition Commission of India (Commitment) (Amendment) Regulations, 2026, substantially recalibrating the procedural timelines that govern how such applications are decided.
The underlying case traces to IndiGo's cancellation of 2,507 flights and delay of a further 1,852 over three days in early December 2025, which stranded an estimated three lakh passengers and triggered sharp fare spikes on affected routes. The CCI had earlier rejected IndiGo's challenge to its jurisdiction, relying on Supreme Court precedent that a sector regulator's existence (that is the DGCA, which itself disclaimed authority over airfare pricing) does not oust the Commission's jurisdiction. In an order dated 4 February 2026, it was found that investigation under Sections 4(2)(a)(i) and 4(2)(b)(i) for unfair conditions and unjustifiable limitation of service warranted as IndiGo constitutes roughly 60% share of the domestic passenger market and due to its conduct during the cancellations.
Rather than contesting the allegations to a final finding, IndiGo filed a commitment application under Section 48B, offering a package of remedies for any future large scale operational disruption which includes constituting a Crisis Management Group that activates virtually within 15 minutes of a disruption and physically at a command centre within one hour, offering affected passengers alternative flights within 48 to 72 hours at no additional charge, capping fares for fresh bookings during a disruption at the tariff ranges most recently filed with the DGCA until capacity is restored and providing automatic refunds within a specific period for passengers who cannot be accommodated. IndiGo maintained in its application that the December disruptions were an isolated event caused by unforeseen circumstances and did not produce anti-competitive effects, offering the commitments without conceding wrongdoing.
The new regulatory changes extend the filing window for commitment applications from 45 to 60 days from receipt of the Director General's (“DG”) investigation report, lengthen the Commission's preliminary consideration period from 7 to 15 working days and extend the overall timeline for deciding a commitment application from 130 to 180 days. The CCI explained the changes as a response to administrative and procedural issues identified since the commitment mechanism as introduced by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023 first came into use and noted it had considered but rejected stakeholder suggestions to allow commitment applications at any stage before the DG's investigation report is submitted as doing so would undermine procedural certainty and delay inquiries.
CCI Hosts BRICS Heads of Competition Authorities Meeting in Udaipur
On 8 August 2026, the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) hosted the Meeting of Heads of BRICS Competition Authorities in Udaipur, Rajasthan, as part of India's chairship of the BRICS grouping for the year, bringing together heads and senior officials from the competition authorities of fellow member states to discuss cooperation on enforcement and emerging policy challenges.
In her inaugural address, CCI Chairperson Ravneet Kaur framed BRICS competition authorities as sharing a responsibility to preserve and promote markets that reward efficiency, protect consumer welfare, encourage innovation and give businesses a fair chance to compete on merit. She pointed specifically to the increasingly cross-border character of digital markets and emerging technologies as a reason why sustained cooperation and information-sharing among BRICS regulators is more important, a challenge competition authorities worldwide have been grappling with, since digital platforms rarely respect national borders even though antitrust enforcement remains largely organised on a country-by-country basis.
The meeting closed with remarks from the assembled heads of BRICS competition authorities reaffirming their commitment to continued dialogue, cooperation and knowledge-sharing to strengthen enforcement in increasingly interconnected markets.
European Commission Sends Statement of Objections Over UPM–Sappi Graphic Paper Joint Venture
On 26 August 2026, the European Commission (“EC”) sent a Statement of Objections to UPM-Kymmene Corporation and Sappi Limited, the two largest manufacturers of communication paper in the European Economic Area, in its Phase II review of their proposed graphic paper joint venture (Case M.12270). The Commission's preliminary view is that the deal may restrict competition in the markets for coated mechanical and coated woodfree paper, used for magazines, books and other printed materials, by allowing the combined business to raise prices and reduce choice for customers such as printers and publishers across twelve mills in six countries.
The transaction, which traces back to a non-binding letter of intent signed in December 2025 and definitive agreements signed on 28 May 2026, would combine the entirety of UPM's Communication Papers business including mills in Augsburg, Schongau, Rauma, Kymi and Jämsänkoski, plus the Caledonian mill in the United Kingdom and the Blandin mill in the United States with Sappi's European graphic paper assets at Gratkorn, Ehingen, Maastricht and Kirkniemi, into a new, independently run 50/50 joint venture. UPM would receive roughly €475 million in cash plus shareholder loans and 50% of the venture's equity, with Sappi receiving a smaller cash sum plus its own 50% stake; either party may seek to divest its shareholding three years after closing.
The review had already been delayed once: the Commission paused its own Phase II clock under Article 11(3) of the Merger Regulation in May 2026 after the parties failed to supply requested information within the prescribed deadline, pushing the statutory decision date from 26 October to 11 November 2026. In its preliminary assessment, the Commission indicated it was not yet convinced that the efficiencies UPM and Sappi have advanced would be sufficient to offset the competitive harm.
A Statement of Objections is a formal step - both companies can respond in writing, inspect the Commission's case file, request an oral hearing and propose structural or behavioural remedies before the deadline. UPM and Sappi confirmed receipt on 26 August and said they were reviewing the objections together, with UPM maintaining that the venture remains necessary to secure reliable graphic paper supply for European customers. The case sits at the centre of a recurring tension in EU merger review of declining industries — whether permitting two struggling competitors to combine protects domestic supply security, or whether it simply narrows the field of independent suppliers, particularly amid concerns that continued consolidation could deepen European printers' reliance on lower-cost Asian imports.
Corteva Settles Arkansas Antitrust Suit Over Pesticide Rebates for $3.1 Million
On 14 August 2026, Corteva agreed to pay $3.1 million to settle a suit brought by the Arkansas Attorney General (“AG”) alleging that the company's post patent rebate and loyalty programmes functioned as de facto exclusive dealing arrangements, discouraging distributors from purchasing competing generic pesticides. The settlement, filed as a preliminary approval motion in Arkansas federal court, still requires final judicial sign-off.
The Arkansas suit traces back to a September 2022 complaint filed by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and ten AGs against Corteva and co-defendant Syngenta, alleging the companies' loyalty programmes paid distributors end-of-year rebates conditioned on purchasing all or nearly all of their annual requirements of pesticides containing certain active ingredients from the defendant, leaving little room to stock cheaper generic equivalents once those ingredients came off patent. Arkansas filed its own parallel suit in December 2022 based on the same core allegations, which an Arkansas federal judge declined to dismiss in February 2025, finding the state's claims that the rebate structures suppressed generic competition and kept crop protection prices artificially high were adequately pled.
The Arkansas settlement will require the company to end part of its loyalty programme and is intended to open distribution channels to generic pesticide manufacturers, lowering costs for farmers. That settlement leaves other elements of Corteva's rebate structure in place and does not address exclusive dealing practices outside the pesticide sector and like the Arkansas settlement remains subject to final court approval.
Sources
In Re: Cartelisation by Agro Input Dealers Association & Agro Input Welfare Association, Case No. 06 of 2023, Competition Commission of India (order dated Aug. 21, 2026).
Kartikeya Rawal v. InterGlobe Aviation Ltd., Case No. 44 of 2025, Competition Commission of India (prima facie order dated Feb. 4, 2026; commitment proceedings pending).
UPM-Kymmene/Sappi, Case No. M.12270, European Commission (Phase II investigation; Statement of Objections dated Aug. 26, 2026).
State of Arkansas v. Corteva, Inc. & Syngenta AG, E.D. Ark. (preliminary settlement approval motion filed Aug. 14, 2026).
Competition Commission of India, 'CCI Imposes Monetary and Non-Monetary Sanctions on Agro Input Dealers Association, Agro Input Welfare Association for Indulging in Anti-Competitive Conduct', CCI Press Release (Aug. 21, 2026), available at https://www.cci.gov.in/index.php?id=183&option=com_content&task=view
'CCI Imposes Monetary and Non-Monetary Sanctions on Agro Input Dealers Association, Agro Input Welfare Association for Indulging in Anti-Competitive Conduct', Orissa Diary (Aug. 21, 2026), available at https://orissadiary.com/cci-imposes-monetary-and-non-monetary-sanctions-on-agro-input-dealers-association-agro-input-welfare-association-for-indulging-in-anti-competitive-conduct/
'IndiGo Offers Commitments in Abuse-of-Dominance Case; CCI Seeks Comments', Business Standard (July 23, 2026), available at https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/indigo-offers-commitments-in-abuse-of-dominance-case-cci-seeks-comments-126072301090_1.html
'CCI Notifies Revised Commitment Regulations 2026 Extending Filing Window for Antitrust Settlement Applications', Sansa Legal (Aug. 2026), available at https://www.sansalegal.com/post/cci-notifies-revised-commitment-regulations-2026-extending-filing-window-for-antitrust-settlement-ap
'CCI Orders Probe into IndiGo over Flight Cancellations, Fare Surge', Bar & Bench (Feb. 5, 2026), available at https://www.barandbench.com/amp/story/news/litigation/cci-orders-probe-into-indigo-over-flight-cancellations-fare-surge
'Kartikeya Rawal v. InterGlobe Aviation: A Case Note on Regulatory Overlap in Indian Aviation', Mondaq (July 23, 2026), available at https://www.mondaq.com/india/antitrust-eu-competition/1821710/kartikeya-rawal-v-interglobe-aviation-a-case-note-on-regulatory-overlap-in-indian-aviation
'Competition Commission of India (CCI) Hosts BRICS Heads of Competition Authorities 2026 Meeting', Odisha Diary (Aug. 10, 2026), available at https://orissadiary.com/competition-commission-of-india-cci-hosts-brics-heads-of-competition-authorities-2026-meeting/
European Commission, 'Commission Sends Statement of Objections over Proposed Joint Venture Between UPM and Sappi', Press Release IP/26/1747 (Aug. 26, 2026), available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1747
'Brussels Warns UPM and Sappi Merger Would Raise Magazine Paper Prices', Wood Central (Aug. 2026), available at https://woodcentral.com.au/upm-sappi-joint-venture-objections/
'UPM Receives European Commission's Statement of Objections', Paper Age (Aug. 26, 2026), available at https://www.paperage.com/2026news/08-26-2026upm-receives-european-commissions-statement-of-objections.html
Sappi, 'Sappi and UPM Announce the Signing of Binding Agreements for Proposed Joint Venture', Sappi News (2026), available at https://www.sappi.com/en-us/node/19996
'Corteva To Pay $3.1M In Ark. AG's Pesticides Antitrust Suit', Law360 (Aug. 14, 2026), available at https://www.law360.com/compliance/articles/2513596