Welcome to the second edition of the “Namaste Korea” newsletter. This newsletter provides an overview of the latest business/trade news and developments in Indian law and practice which are relevant to Korean businesses and other organizations with India-related interests. The newsletter also includes sector-specific updates, including in telecom, electronics, semiconductors, automotive, financial services, gaming, and healthcare.
The Karnataka High Court (“Court”), in its judgement dated September 30, 2024 in Ms. X v. Internal Complaints Committee, ANI Technologies Private Limited and Ors., held that the relationship between ANI Technologies Private Limited (“OLA”) and its driver subscribers was an employer-employee relationship for purposes of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (“POSH Act”) and such driver subscribers could not be considered as independent contractors.
The judgement, which closely scrutinizes OLA’s subscription agreements with its driver subscribers and customers, states that OLA cannot, on one hand, exercise complete control over the activities performed by the driver subscribers, while, on the other hand, onboard them as independent contractors to evade its responsibilities under relevant statutes. The judgment also analyzes the intent and objectives of the POSH Act and the wide ambit of the definitions of employer, employee and workplace under the POSH Act in furtherance of these objectives.
OLA has filed an appeal against the judgment before the Division Bench of the Court, which has issued an interim order staying its operation, stating that the issues raised in the judgement require further consideration. While the outcome of the appeal is awaited, the Court’s judgment of September 30, 2024, through its detailed reasoning, assumes significance in contributing to the discourse on the status of gig workers in the current labor economy and the responsibilities and liabilities of companies who engage such workers on a contract basis.
The compliance calendar sets out key regulatory compliance requirements (both periodic and event-based) for Category III AIFs under SEBI regulations and other important applicable laws in India.
The compliance calendar sets out key regulatory compliance requirements (both periodic and event-based) for Category II AIFs under SEBI regulations and other important applicable laws in India.
The compliance calendar sets out key regulatory compliance requirements (both periodic and event-based) for Category I AIFs under SEBI regulations and other important applicable laws in India.
A recent decision by the Supreme Court has clarified the chargeability of stamp duty on concession agreements in India. Concession in Rewa Tollway P. Limited v. the State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court has decisively laid down that a concession agreement permitting tolling in favor of the concessionaire should be stamped as if it were a lease. This would have significant cost implications for infrastructure project delivery in India through the public private partnership mode.
This note analyzes the law regarding stamp duty payable on concession agreements in India including the aforementioned decisions and the impact this decision could have on past and present concessions.
This note, the third of a multi-part series on investing in the Indian artificial intelligence (“AI”) sector, discusses a set of advisories (“AI Advisories”) with respect to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (“Intermediary Guidelines”), focusing on intermediary liability.
The definition of ‘intermediaries’ under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (which is likely to be replaced soon by the “Digital India Act”) may include a wide variety of entities, including telecommunications and network service providers, search engines, online payment sites and marketplaces, as well as social media, online gaming and e-commerce platforms. The Indian government has been actively considering the advisability of issuing a dedicated regulation with respect to AI, including via specific provisions of the Digital India Act. Until the rollout of a bespoke legal framework, the Intermediary Guidelines may be further amended in connection with AI.
At present, the language of the AI Advisories is broad enough to cover all kinds of AI tools and AI-generated content. Such broad-based application could have significant consequences for all types of players in the AI space since the standards of due diligence that relevant intermediaries need to abide by with respect to AI technologies appear to be high.
Indian trade and shipping are pivotal to the country’s economic growth, with ports serving as essential gateways for the movement of goods and resources. With a vast coastline of 7,517 kilometers, India has numerous major and non-major ports that facilitate both domestic and international trade. These ports play a crucial role in handling cargo, ensuring efficient supply chains, and supporting various industries, making them vital to the nation’s overall economic infrastructure and global trade connectivity. The Indian government has increasingly recognized that the privatization of ports can introduce best practices and modern technology, significantly enhancing operational efficiency and competitiveness.
Indian ports and terminals often face legal challenges in enforcing claims for unpaid dues and damages. A recent ruling by the Orissa High Court regarding the vessel M.V. Debi highlights these issues, allowing the vessel’s arrest to enforce a maritime lien held by Paradip International Cargo Terminal Pvt. Ltd. (“PICTPL”) for unpaid berth hire charges. This decision underscores the enforceability of maritime liens and clarifies that port concessionaires can pursue claims even without a direct contractual relationship with the vessel or its owner.
This note examines common disputes faced by ports, such as tariff non-payment and damage to port property, which often arise from ambiguous contractual terms and regulatory changes. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the available legal avenues, including admiralty suits and civil litigation, to navigate these challenges effectively.
As the sector increasingly shifts towards privatization, a supportive policy framework has emerged to attract investments and enhance operational efficiency. However, this transition necessitates robust dispute resolution mechanisms to address grievances effectively. The need for streamlined processes is critical to manage the complexities of long-term contracts while ensuring timely redressal of claims. Ultimately, these legal frameworks will play a crucial role in maintaining competitiveness and facilitating growth within India’s maritime industry.
Section 19(6) of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 (“Act/RERA”) casts an obligation on an allottee to make timely payment of instalments as per the payment schedule mentioned in the registered agreement for sale. What happens when an allottee fails to comply with this obligation?
This note scrutinizes the order passed by Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal and talks about the remedies available to a developer in case an allottee defaults in making timely payment of the sale consideration. It also analyzes the position pre and post RERA regime and dives into the concept of earnest money and liquidated damages in terms of the agreement for sale.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India, and the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) have introduced certain amendments to the Competition Act, 2002 (“Competition Act”) and the regulations framed thereunder. These include introduction of deal value thresholds to the Competition Act, relaxations for open offers and implementation of stock exchange purchases, changes to certain exemptions to test the notifiability of transactions, and changes to the CCI review timelines. This note describes the changes introduced to the Competition Act and the regulations framed thereunder.