2018 has been a tumultuous year for Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) with each quarter bringing about significant changes in their investment regime. Arguably, the clubbing of their investment limits has wreaked the most havoc of all such changes.
On 8 January 2019, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) delivered a landmark judgment in Ferro Alloys Corporation Limited v Rural Electrification Corporation Limited (Comp. App (AT) (Ins) No. 92 of 2017) and other connected appeals. The subject matter of the judgment addresses the question whether a corporate insolvency resolution process can be initiated against the corporate guarantor without initiating the insolvency process against the principal debtor under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (Code).
The Supreme Court in the recent case of Anand Kumar Mohatta and Anr v State (Government of NCT of Delhi) (Criminal Appeal No 1395 of 2018) decided on 15 November 2018 has held that there is no bar to the maintainability of a quashing petition under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CRPC) even where the chargesheet has been filed.
Vide a recent judgment dated 3 January 2019 in the matter of Government of Haryana PWD Haryana (B and R) Branch v M/s G F Toll Road Pvt Ltd & Ors (Civil Appeal No. 27/2019 in S.L.P. (C) No. 20201 of 2018), the Supreme Court has, to an extent, clarified the issue regarding the appointment of a former employee of a company which is a party to an arbitration as an arbitrator under the present as well as the previous arbitration regime.
In view of the Central Government’s objective of improving “ease of doing business” in India, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) announced a new framework for external commercial borrowings (ECB) on 16 January 2019 liberalising the current ECB policy (the Revised ECB Framework).
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) delivered on its commitment to bring transparency, objectivity and consistency to the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations 2015 (Insider Trading Regulations) while implementing recommendations of the Report of the Committee on Fair Market Conduct of 8 August 2018 under the chairmanship of Dr T K Viswanathan (Committee), by way of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 (Amendment Regulations) that will be effective from 1 April 2019.
In its judgement dated 7 January 2019 (Wockhardt Limited & Anr v Union of India – Writ Petition 9739 of 2018), a single Judge of the Delhi High Court (High Court) has set aside the impugned notification dated 7 September 2018 which had prohibited the manufacture, distribution and sale of a particular fixed dose combination marketed by Wockhardt Limited (Wockhardt FDC) and remanded the matter to the Drug Technical Advisory Board (DTAB)/Sub-committee constituted by the DTAB.
In the case of Sabha Shanker Dube v Divisional Forest Officer (Civil Appeal No 10956 of 2018), a division bench of the Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) comprising of Mr. Justice S A Bobde and Mr. Justice Nageswara Rao, has reiterated the law on equal pay for equal work as long as the employees are engaged in similar work and responsibilities. The Supreme Court, while considering the correctness of a judgment passed by a division bench of the High Court of Allahabad (High Court), upheld the law on the subject of parity of pay scales on the principle of equal pay for equal work.
The Karnataka Appellate Authority for Advance Rulings (AAAR) has upheld the ruling of the Karnataka Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) in the application filed by Columbia Asia Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. (Applicant). The AAR had ruled that the activities carried out by employees of the Corporate office (CO) of the Applicant for the Applicant’s branch offices would be taxable as supplies between distinct persons.
On 14 December 2018, the special bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, comprising five judges (Special Bench), delivered a landmark judgment in Carlsberg Breweries a/s v Som Distilleries and Breweries Limited, C.S.(COMM) 690/2018 on the maintainability of a composite suit of design infringement and passing off. The Special Bench, on a thorough examination of precedents and statutory law in relation to such suits, overruled the judgment of the full bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, comprising three judges, in Mohan Lal v.
