MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LTD. versus SIZA FOODS (PVT.) LIMITED
Sections 2 (1) (P), 3 (3) (H) and 4 (1) Complaint against the complainant of the dominant position, the company to consider non-alcoholic beverages for fast food chain to Pakistan The letter was written to the company with the request, but the request made by the company was not heeded by the analysis of the purchase orders ordered by the complainant. It was revealed that the soft drinks delivery request was made to another company only and no purchase order was issued to anybody. Analyst, the other beverage maker of the information submitted, concluded to the inquiry officer that the company enjoyed dominant position because of its market share in the relevant market and because of its ability to behave freely with its competitors and consumers. Having been The violation of sections 3 (3) (h) and 4 (1) of the Competitive Ordinance, 2007, mainly in the case of the Company, in the present case, the process of obtaining product from only one particular company has been brought to court. The execution of Section 4 of the Ordinance, 2007, was akin to special matters, which in its simplest form was an arrangement between a manufacturer and a buyer that prohibited the buyer from purchasing the contractual goods from another seller, or The buyer needed to take it all in. Due to its special case management with the manufacturer engaged in refusing to deal with the manufacturer's competitors, its requirements in the goods contracted with its manufacturer and the competitor's provisions of section 3 of the Competition Ordinance Attracts The company, however, had its
