S&R Associates is an Indian law firm with offices in New Delhi and Mumbai providing legal services to Indian and international clients.
Our lawyers are admitted to practice in India and many have previously practiced law in other jurisdictions, including in the United States, the United Kingdom and Singapore. As a result, we offer our clients a unique combination of Indian law expertise coupled with international quality legal services.
We distinguish ourselves based on the quality of our services and legal advice and on the range of our experience. Our lawyers have advised on some of the most significant Indian transactions and matters in recent times. The quality of our legal advice and services has helped us become the law firm of choice for our clients and has also been recognised by various industry publications, surveys and rankings. Lawyers in each of our practice areas have routinely been recognised as leading lawyers in India by Chambers Global, Chambers Asia Pacific, IFLR1000, Legal500 and RSG India Report.
The rise of the digital sector has presented unique challenges for Indian regulatory authorities, including the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”), thanks to significant differences in the way such markets operate compared to traditional markets. There is growing demand, worldwide and in India, to hold digital platforms responsible and accountable for adverse impacts caused by them. A preliminary step involved in such probes is that of defining a ‘relevant market’ within which such digital platforms operate. This note analyzes the CCI’s approach on defining a ‘relevant market’ in the digital sector so far, and the need of the hour in terms of considering all substitutable and interchangeable products or services while defining such markets.
India has witnessed a significant increase in institutional shareholder activism over the past few years. As a consequence of the rapid rise in shareholder activism, there has been much greater focus on the rights of minority shareholders in relation to a company. In this context, the judgment of the division bench of the Bombay High Court on March 22, 2022 in Invesco Developing Markets Fund v. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited addresses two key issues: (i) the statutory right of shareholders to call a shareholders’ meeting and (ii) the appropriate judicial forum for such shareholder disputes.
By an order issued on January 14, 2022, the United States District Court, Northern District of California allowed the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to proceed on the misappropriation theory of insider trading in its “shadow trading” complaint against Matthew Panuwat. The SEC had alleged that Panuwat used confidential information about the acquisition of his employer, Medivation, to buy options in another publicly traded company and Medivation’s peer, Incyte. This note discusses the circumstances in which trading in securities of a company while in possession of information related to another company may be considered a violation of the Indian Insider Trading Regulations.