Low pricing is not unlawful merely because competitors complain. Predation usually requires dominance, pricing below the relevant cost benchmark and an exc
Finin2min summary
Low pricing is not unlawful merely because competitors complain. Predation usually requires dominance, pricing below the relevant cost benchmark and an exclusionary strategy.
Source review date: 4 July 2026. Read with the official text and the facts of the transaction.
Legal anchors
- Section 4(2)(a)
- CCI cost regulations
How to analyse it
- Determine dominance first.
- Select statutory cost benchmark.
- Separate introductory, promotional and volume discounts.
- Assess recoupment and exclusion evidence as economically relevant.
Practical illustration
A dominant app subsidises one side of a two-sided market. The full platform economics and allocation of costs matter.
What can go wrong?
- Using accounting loss as proof of predation
- Ignoring multi-sided revenues
- No contemporaneous discount policy
Evidence pack
- Cost records
- Discount approvals
- Business plans
- Competitor and entry evidence
Decision workflow
- Freeze the facts and effective date.
- Identify the controlling Act, rule, notification, circular and jurisdictional overlay.
- Prepare a calculation or exposure note.
- Collect the evidence pack before filing, payment, signing or response.
- Record reviewer conclusion and assumptions.
Quick Q&A
Is the result automatic?
No. Determine dominance first.
What is the most important control?
Assess recoupment and exclusion evidence as economically relevant.
What should be escalated?
Using accounting loss as proof of predation, especially where money, deadlines, enforcement, personal liability or irreversible transaction steps are involved.
Official source trail
Secondary commentary may help interpretation, but it is not the source of law.