#e4mExclusive:  Publicis Groupe set to challenge Delhi HC order in CCI probe

French advertising giant Publicis Groupe is preparing to challenge a recent order of the Delhi High Court, according to people familiar with the matter. 

This comes after the court disposed of a writ petition filed by its Indian legal entity TLG India in an alleged media cartel probe. 

The order, passed by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, declined to entertain a plea by TLG India Private Limited against an ongoing investigation initiated by the Competition Commission of India (CCI), effectively pushing the matter back to the regulator’s domain.

According to legal sources privy to the development, the decision has prompted the global network to evaluate its options, including filing an appeal or initiating fresh proceedings to contest the manner in which notices were issued by the competition watchdog.

TLG India had approached the High Court challenging the legality of a CCI investigation launched through a suo motu order dated August 9, 2024. The company argued that the probe had been directed not at a legally identifiable entity, but at “Publicis Groupe” which it claimed is merely a brand name and not a juridical entity either in India or France.

However, the court observed that no notice had been issued to TLG India itself, thereby eliminating any immediate cause of action. It further held that questions around the correct identification of the entity under investigation fall squarely within the jurisdiction of the CCI.

“In the absence of any notice having been issued to the present petitioner, no cause of action presently survives,” the court said while disposing of the petition, leaving all rights and contentions open.

Publicis weighs legal moves

Industry executives and legal experts said the ruling is unlikely to end the dispute, with the Publicis Groupe expected to contest the proceedings in front of the division bench of Delhi High Court.

Another person aware of the deliberations said the group is particularly concerned about jurisdictional clarity and procedural fairness, especially since notices were issued to the non-legal entity in India. 

Case so far

Senior counsel Ritin Rai, representing TLG India Private Limited, submitted that the regulator’s prima facie order referred to “Publicis Groupe” without identifying a specific legal entity, even as summons issued in that name were addressed to the offices and employees of TLG India. 

Rai contended that investigations under the law must be directed at an identifiable “enterprise”, and argued that Publicis Groupe was merely a brand or trade name and not a juristic person under Indian law.

Senior advocate Jayant Mehta, appearing for the Competition Commission of India had opposed the petition on grounds of maintainability, arguing that the Competition Act permits investigation against “persons” , a term broad enough to include associations and entities within a corporate group.

The petition had sought clarity on the entity under probe and the quashing of summons, along with reliefs including inspection of records, substitution of TLG India as the proper party, and rectification of an earlier order dated September 8, 2024. 

TLG India had also flagged concerns that delays in judicial intervention especially following search and seizure operations at its offices could render its challenge infructuous and impair its ability to assess the scope of the investigation. 

According to court filings, the CCI probe, initiated in March 2025, relates to alleged price-fixing and collusion involving major advertising agencies, global networks and industry bodies operating in India.

The case could have wider ramifications for multinational corporations operating in India under global brand structures. If pursued further, it may test how Indian regulators identify and proceed against complex corporate networks where branding and legal entities differ.