Privacy Policy: Delhi High Court Adjourns To August 27 Whatsapp's Appeal Against CCI Investigation
Time to file reply to the notices dated June 4, 2021 and June 8, 2021 issued by CCI to WhatsApp and Facebook respectively, are extended till then.
The Delhi High Court on Friday adjourned to August 27 appeal filed by WhatsApp and its parent company Facebook Inc against a single bench order declining to interfere with CCI's investigation. A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh allowed the request made by Advocate Samar Bansal, appearing on behalf of CCI, seeking accommodation for ASG's appearance in...
The Delhi High Court on Friday adjourned to August 27 appeal filed by WhatsApp and its parent company Facebook Inc against a single bench order declining to interfere with CCI's investigation.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh allowed the request made by Advocate Samar Bansal, appearing on behalf of CCI, seeking accommodation for ASG's appearance in the matter.
"Counsel for Respondent No. 1 seeks some time. Request is allowed. List this matter on August 27. Time to file reply to the notices dated June 4, 2021 and June 8, 2021 issued by CCI to WhatsApp and Facebook respectively, are extended till then," the Bench ordered.
The Competition Commission of India had ordered a probe into the new privacy policy of WhatsApp, after making a prima facie observation that it was violative of the Competition Act 2000.
Issuing notices to both Whatsapp and its parent company, CCI observed that the privacy policy terms on sharing of personalised data with Facebook companies was "neither fully transparent nor based on specific, voluntary consent of users".
The deadline for responding to the CCI notices was August 5. Senior Advocates Harish Salve and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Whatsapp and Facebook had stated that they have no objection to adjournment if time to respond to the notices is extended accordingly.
Earlier, Whatsapp had undertaken to not enforce its privacy policy till the time the Data Protection Bill comes out. Salve had assured the Court that the company will conform to the parliamentary law.
"If parliament allows me to do it, I'll do it. Otherwise I won't do it. It has become academic now. The commitment is that I'll not do anything if the parliamentary law comes. When such law is made, we need to fit in the law," Salve had submitted.
Rohatgi for Facebook had argued that there was overlapping of issues before the Supreme Court, the High Court and the CCI and stated that the CCI's examination of the matter was therefore impinging on constitutional propriety.
"Suo moto Jurisdiciton is to be sparingly exercised by a body like CCI. The Supreme Court is already examining the 2016 policy. There are three matters are pending in the Delhi High Court. The question is even assuming there is suo moto Jurisdiciton, can it be exercised when superior constitutional courts are examining the policy?" Rohatgi had said.