Law Maker
All subjects

Competition Law MCQs and mock tests

60 distinct Competition Law questions are in live Law Maker papers, used across 1 exam. Each was checked against the official text and comes with the answer and an explanation once you submit.

Build a Competition Law test10 to 100 questions, your timer and marking, new questions first. Free account needed.

Read the Act: The Competition Act, 2002 (official text, section by section).

Competition Law practice sets

2 sets, 1 free.

Exams with Competition Law questions

Sample Competition Law questions

From free papers. Try each one before you open the answer.

  1. Question 1 · Competition Law Practice Set 1

    Under Explanation (a) to Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002, "dominant position" means a position of strength enjoyed by an enterprise in the relevant market in India which enables it to:

    1. A. Operate independently of competitive forces, or affect competitors or consumers in its favour
    2. B. Acquire control over other enterprises in the market without notifying the Commission
    3. C. Hold more than half of the total sales in the relevant market for three consecutive years
    4. D. Fix prices for the relevant market with the prior approval of the sectoral regulator concerned
    Show the answer

    A. Operate independently of competitive forces, or affect competitors or consumers in its favour

    Explanation (a) to Section 4 defines dominant position by reference to the ability to operate independently of competitive forces prevailing in the relevant market, or to affect competitors, consumers or the relevant market in its favour. The Act prescribes no market-share figure.

  2. Question 2 · Competition Law Practice Set 1

    In Excel Crop Care Ltd. v. Competition Commission of India (2017), bids in a Food Corporation of India tender were submitted under a collusive agreement on 8 May 2009, before Section 3 came into force on 20 May 2009, but the tender process continued after that date. The Supreme Court held that:

    1. A. Section 3 could not apply, since applying it would give the Act retrospective operation
    2. B. Section 3 applied only if the Central Government had notified the tender as a continuing contract
    3. C. Section 3 applied, because the agreement continued to operate and was acted upon after 20 May 2009
    4. D. Section 3 applied only to the tenders floated after the date on which the Commission was established
    Show the answer

    C. Section 3 applied, because the agreement continued to operate and was acted upon after 20 May 2009

    The Court in Excel Crop Care Ltd. v. CCI (2017) held that the role of the bidders did not end with submission of bids on 8 May 2009; the arrangement continued and was acted upon after 20 May 2009, when Section 3 was brought into force, so the inquiry was covered by Section 3 without any retrospective application.

  3. Question 3 · Competition Law Practice Set 1

    An agreement requiring a purchaser of goods, as a condition of such purchase, to purchase some other distinct goods is described in the Explanation to Section 3(4) of the Competition Act, 2002 as:

    1. A. Exclusive distribution agreement
    2. B. Tie-in arrangement
    3. C. Exclusive dealing agreement
    4. D. Refusal to deal
    Show the answer

    B. Tie-in arrangement

    Clause (a) of the Explanation to Section 3(4), as substituted in 2023, defines a tie-in arrangement as any agreement requiring a purchaser of goods or services, as a condition of such purchase, to purchase some other distinct goods or services.

  4. Question 4 · Competition Law Practice Set 1

    Which of the following are factors listed in Section 19(4) of the Competition Act, 2002 for inquiring whether an enterprise enjoys a dominant position? 1. Countervailing buying power 2. Social obligations and social costs 3. Dependence of consumers on the enterprise 4. Foreclosure of competition Select the correct answer:

    1. A. 1 and 4 only
    2. B. 1, 2, 3 and 4
    3. C. 2, 3 and 4 only
    4. D. 1, 2 and 3 only
    Show the answer

    D. 1, 2 and 3 only

    Section 19(4) lists, among others, dependence of consumers on the enterprise (f), countervailing buying power (i) and social obligations and social costs (k). Foreclosure of competition is a factor under Section 19(3)(c) for appreciable adverse effect of agreements, not for dominance.

  5. Question 5 · Competition Law Practice Set 1

    Under Section 3(2) of the Competition Act, 2002, an agreement entered into in contravention of Section 3(1) is:

    1. A. Void
    2. B. Voidable at the option of the Commission
    3. C. Unenforceable only against consumers
    4. D. Valid until set aside by the Appellate Tribunal
    Show the answer

    A. Void

    Section 3(2) declares that any agreement entered into in contravention of Section 3(1) shall be void. No order of the Commission or Tribunal is needed to make it void.