From Intervention To Embedded Regulation: A Comparative Analysis Of Abuse Of Dominant Position In India And The United Kingdom
- IJLLR Journal
- 7 minutes ago
- 1 min read
Saumya Mishra, LL.M., NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.
Aditya Vidyarthi, LL.M., NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.
ABSTRACT
This research paper examines how modern governments have changed their approach to managing the economy. Historically, many countries followed an interventionist model where the government directly controlled businesses and industries. However, in recent decades, there has been a global shift toward becoming a regulatory state. This change is characterized by the disaggregation of the state, which means moving power away from a single central government body and giving it to specialized, independent regulators like the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in the UK. The study focuses on the legal regulation of economic activity to ensure fair competition. By comparing India and the UK, the paper analyses how these two jurisdictions handle market power. In the UK, scholars like Giandomenico Majone and Karen Yeung describe the regulator as a "thick" and specialized institution designed to keep the market efficient. In contrast, the Indian context is often explored through the work of Navroz Dubash and Bronwen Morgan, who argue that India acts as an "embedded" regulatory state. This means the CCI must often balance strict legal rules with local social and political pressures. Furthermore, the research uses William Twining’s theory on the "reception" of law to explain that India did not just copy the UK’s system. Instead, India adapted these "legal transplants" to fit its own unique needs. The paper concludes by evaluating whether these regulators are truly independent or if they are still influenced by the states that created them.
