Unlike the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (“CPA 2019”), has defined ‘direct selling’[1], and expressly included any person who buys products or avails services through direct selling or multi-level marketing within the definition of ‘consumer’. However, a framework for regulating direct selling under the CPA 2019 has not been put into place till now. With the recently released draft Consumer Protection (Direct Selling) Rules, 2021 (“Draft Rules”), the Department of Consumer Affairs has finally taken demonstrable steps towards formalising the regulatory framework for direct selling entities in India.
In recent times, the debate around safe harbour protection has grabbed media attention on account of the recently notified Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (“2021 Intermediary Rules”), and the ensuing spat between the Government and social media heavyweights like Twitter.
Continue Reading Safe Harbour Protection for E-Commerce platforms
Recent amendments to the statutory framework under the Companies Act, 2013 (“the Act”), have cast focus on the ever-expanding statutory duties of the auditors of a company. The purpose of an audit is to enhance the degree of confidence of users of the financial statements. In this regard, Section 129 of the Act provides that the financial statements prepared by a company should comply with three prime conditions: Continue Reading Gatekeepers of Governance – The Statutory Auditor
In 2008, Bank Atlantic, a Florida based bank, sued a prominent Wall Street analyst over a report on potential bank failures titled “Who’s Next?” The Bank stated that the analyst had defamed the bank by suggesting that it might fail. Bank Atlantic had previously sued ABC over a news report in 1991. In 2009, Hertz Global Holdings Inc., sued an analyst for defamation over a report that Hertz claimed, suggests that the world’s largest car rental company could go bankrupt.
Continue Reading Corporate Defamation: A Perspective on Analyst Reports
An essential principle of criminal law is that the trial of an offence should take place in the presence of the accused. This principle has been embodied in Section 273 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”), which provides, as a general rule, that all evidence taken in the course of trial shall be taken in presence of the accused. While it cannot be denied that such a rule is mainly for the protection of the interest of the accused, CrPC has provisions allowing courts the discretion, in certain circumstances, to exempt an accused from personal appearance. However, exemption from personal appearance is not available to an accused as a matter of right; and is subject to the discretion of the Court.
1. On June 18, 2021, the Delhi High Court, in proceedings seeking enforcement of arbitral awards against foreign states, has reiterated the principle of restrictive immunity and upheld the basic tenets of International Commercial Arbitration – flexibility, stability, efficiency, and its legally binding nature. The Court held that prior consent of the Central Government under Section 86 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“Code”), is not required for enforcement of arbitral awards against a foreign state. Importantly, it also held that foreign state cannot claim sovereign immunity for the purpose of stalling enforcement of an arbitral award rendered against it, and which arises out of a commercial transaction.
The SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2021 (“2021 Regulations”), were notified on June 10, 2021. The new regulations do not substantially deviate from the SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2009 (“2009 Regulations”). However, certain incremental changes are introduced that further refine and streamline the delisting process. The key changes effected by the 2021 Regulations, with specific reference to voluntary delisting offers, are as follows:
Part II of the article discusses the Indian legal position on attorney-client privilege as well as best practices during internal investigations and for work-from home setups.
Part I discuses the concept of attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine and the legal position in the US and the UK.
The legal privilege or attorney-client privilege is often regarded as the crown jewel of the legal profession. It provides protection from disclosure of communications between a client and an attorney made for the purpose of seeking legal advice. Continue Reading Legal Privilege and Covid-19 – Part I