Publicis sues India antitrust body for denying case files in ad agencies probe

NEW DELHI: Publicis has sued India’s antitrust watchdog for denying access to case files in a high-profile price-fixing investigation of ad agencies, after the French group failed to get the probe stalled until it could review the documents, court filings show.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) shook India’s near-$30 billion media and entertainment sector in March with dawn raids at WPP’s GroupM, Dentsu, Publicis, Omnicom and many other agencies over suspected collusion over publicity rates and discounts.

Details of cartel cases are kept confidential in India, but Reuters has reported that the CCI’s initial assessment found the firms used a WhatsApp group to coordinate and agree on pricing, entered into secret pacts, and colluded with broadcasters to deny business to agencies that didn’t comply.

Concerned the CCI has not responded to its requests in recent months to provide access to case files, Publicis approached the Delhi High Court on August 11 asking judges to order the watchdog to accede to its requests, according to its non-public filing reviewed by Reuters on Thursday.

Publicis and its employees in India are “unable to understand the allegations against them and prepare a defence in the absence of the case records”, it said in the filing.

India raids ad giants GroupM, Dentsu and broadcasters’ body over price collusion, sources say

The CCI did not respond to Reuters queries, and the court is likely to hear Publicis’ case next week.

The filing was made by TLG India, which its court papers said “is the legal entity that houses majority of the advertising business of the Publicis group in India”.

The antitrust investigation was triggered by Dentsu disclosing alleged industry malpractices to the CCI in February 2024 under the regulator’s leniency program, which allows lesser penalties for firms that share evidence of malpractice.

Publicis is the first company to file a lawsuit related to the high-profile CCI investigation in court.

Filings showed the company urged the CCI in July that “further investigation remain in abeyance till” it is granted inspection of case records.

CCI investigations typically take several months. The regulator has powers to impose financial penalties on the media agencies of up to three times their profit or 10% of an Indian entity’s global turnover, whichever is higher, for each year of wrongdoing.

Publicis’ court filing also showed the CCI in July asked for a brief note from the company about its business model, and how operations are coordinated with the parent entity.

On August 4, the CCI issued summons to Publicis’ South Asia chief Anupriya Acharya to appear before investigators, and provide documents such as copies of key contracts involving Publicis and its Indian entities, including on revenue sharing.

Acharya did not respond to Reuters queries, and Publicis has asked the court to quash the summon.