Samsung embroiled in India antitrust probe of Amazon, Flipkart.
Samsung has accused India's competition watchdog of unlawfully detaining its employees and seizing data in a raid carried out in connection with an antitrust investigation on Amazon and Walmart's Flipkart, a legal filing shows.
Samsung is embroiled in the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) investigation that in August concluded that the South Korean giant and other smartphone companies broke antitrust laws by colluding with Amazon and Flipkart to exclusively launch products online.
Samsung's Oct. 11 filing in the High Court in northern city of Chandigarh seeks to quash the investigation findings related to conduct of the company, arguing the CCI had illegally seized material from its employees during a 2022 raid at one of Amazon's vendors.
Three Samsung employees were present in the vicinity of the search when the watchdog's officials detained them, seized their phones and copied all the confidential and privileged data, the company said in its 32-page filing, which hasn't been made public.
The Indian unit of Samsung Electronics stated that the search conducted by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was illegal, and any material collected should not be used or relied upon, urging that it be promptly returned. It further argued that the CCI should be prohibited from using the unlawfully obtained data.
Samsung has obtained an injunction from the High Court that has put on hold the CCI proceedings, but the court has not yet ruled on its requests to return the data seized and to not allow the commission to rely on it.
The CCI has challenged Samsung and 22 other parties that have won similar injunctions from high courts across India, and last week asked the Supreme Court to hear all challenges together, saying the companies were trying to scuttle the investigation.
In its court filing Samsung also asserted that it was wrongly found to have breached competition laws in collusion with Amazon and Flipkart, even though it had been cooperating with the watchdog and providing information only as a third-party in the case.
Source: Reuters
