Notice given by Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank Limited — Combination C-2014/12/235 (Part 1)
- Case No.C-2014/12/235
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A combination that falls outside the exemption in Item 1 of Schedule 1 because the parties present it as a strategic alliance for establishing a universal bank is a combination that must be notified under sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Competition Act, 2002. Where a notified combination is assessed on the details in the notice and on the factors in sub-section (4) of section 20, the Commission may approve it under sub-section (1) of section 31 if it is of the opinion that the combination is not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India in any relevant market. Where the parties' shares in each overlapping market are insignificant and a large number of players in each market constitutes a competitive constraint, that opinion may be formed. An approval under section 31(1) is without prejudice to any other legal or statutory obligations applicable to the parties, and it stands revoked if the information furnished by the acquirer is found to be incorrect.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. On 29th December 2014, the Competition Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as the “Commission”) received a notice under sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Competition Act, 2002 (“Act”) given by Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank Limited (“SMTB” or “Acquirer”) pursuant to the execution of a share subscription agreement (“SSA”) and a strategic alliance agreement, both dated 25th December 2014 between SMTB and Reliance Capital Limited (“RCL”). (Hereinafter, SMTB and RCL are collectively referred to as “Parties”).
2. The proposed combination is an acquisition of 2.77 per cent of the paid up share capital of RCL by SMTB through share subscription and does not lead to any change in control of RCL. However, the proposed combination does not qualify for exemption under Item 1 Schedule 1 since the Acquirer has submitted that the proposed combination is a strategic alliance between the Parties for the establishment of a universal bank.
3. In terms of Regulation 14 of the Competition Commission of India (Procedure in regard to transaction of business relating to combinations) Regulations, 2011 („Combination Regulations’), vide letter dated 14th January 2015, SMTB was required to remove certain defects and furnish certain information / document (s) by 19th January, 2015. SMTB filed its response on 20th January, 2015 after seeking extension. However, the response was found to be incomplete and another letter dated 23rd January, 2015 was issued to SMTB. The response to the said letter was filed on 2nd February, 2015, after seeking extension. Subsequently, another letter dated 6th February, 2015 was issued to SMTB and the response to the same was received on 16th February, 2015, after seeking extension.
4. The Acquirer is a company incorporated in Japan and is engaged in providing, inter alia, banking and financial services, including asset management, real estate management and financial and consulting services.
(Combination Registration No. C-2014/12/235) Fair Competition For Greater Good 5. RCL, a company incorporated in India, is a systemically important non-deposit taking non-banking financial services company. It is engaged in the business of, inter alia, asset management, mutual funds, life and general insurance, stock broking, wealth management services, home and commercial finance, financial products distribution, asset reconstruction and proprietary investments in India, either directly or through its various subsidiaries.
6. As stated in the notice, SMTB provides loans to Indian companies as external commercial borrowing under the Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing or Lending in Foreign Exchange) Regulations, 2000. Further, an associate enterprise of SMTB, namely, Ambit Investment Advisors Private Limited (“AIAPL”), a company incorporated in India, is engaged in the provision of fund management services to alternative investment funds and investment advisory services.
7. RCL, directly or through its subsidiaries, is engaged in the provision of the following services in India, namely, loans to large corporate customers in India, fund management services to alternative investment funds and investment advisory services, which overlap with those provided directly or indirectly by the Acquirer in India.
8. It has been observed that in each of the markets of loans to large corporate customers, investment advisory services and fund management services to alternative investment funds, SMTB and RCL have insignificant market shares. Further, it is observed that the presence of a large number of players in each of the above said markets would constitute a competitive constraint to the Parties.
9. Considering the facts on record and the details provided in the notice given under sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Act and assessment of the proposed combination on the basis of factors stated in sub-section (4) of section 20 of the Act, the Commission is of the opinion that the proposed combination is not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India in any of the relevant markets and therefore, the Commission hereby approves the same under sub-section (1) of section 31 of the Act.
10. This approval is without prejudice to any other legal/statutory obligations as applicable.
11. This order shall stand revoked if, at any time, the information provided by SMTB is found to be incorrect.
(Combination Registration No. C-2014/12/235) Fair Competition For Greater Good
12. The Secretary is directed to communicate to SMTB accordingly.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free