Burgos, Ruffa Mae

BSBA A1-1

1.The issue in the article is that the PCC (Philippine Competition Commission) violated the petitioners
constitutional right to equal protection of the Laws as the PCC refused to accord the deemed approved
status of acquisition despite of the substantial compliance with the PCC orders. The court of appeal said
that the PCC disregarded the right to due process of the two Telco’s (Globe and PLDT) by “forcing a full
review” of the multi-billion peso buy out deal when it’s authority only allowed “limited review”

2. The PCA interfering with the merger for the reason of possible anticompetitive behavior between the
companies that they want to prevent it from happening and also to ensure fair market competition. The
PCA prohibits entering into anti-competitive agreements like price fixing, bid rigging, abusing a dominant
market position and entering into anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions.

3.Yes, because the court of appeal allowed the companies to get the approval, but still the PCC has the
power to conduct post-acquisition review to ensure that there is no anti-competitive conduct
committed by the parties and since the Telco deals the speed and the coverage of the PLDT broadband
have increased, which should be really be for it’s consumers. The duty of the Court of appeal is to settle
complaints in all cases, based on what they believed that is fair and reasonable.