NCLAT WhatsApp privacy case: CCI data-sharing remedies to apply to advtg, says tribunal

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has allowed the c’s (CCI) application seeking clarification on its earlier judgment in the WhatsApp 2021 privacy policy case, and has clarified that the remedial directions will apply to WhatsApp data collection/sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including advertising.

What CCI asked for

CCI approached the tribunal seeking clarity on the tribunal’s conclusion in para 264(c) of its judgment dated 04.11.2025, arguing that setting aside the directions in para 247.1 of the CCI’s impugned order dated 18.11.2024 could create uncertainty on whether the remaining remedies would extend to advertising-related data sharing.

CCI’s prayer sought directions clarifying that “remedial directions contained in Paras 247.2.1 to Paras 247.2.4… will apply to WhatsApp user data collection and sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including non-advertising and advertising purposes.”

Read On: WhatsApp privacy case: CCI seeks clarity on data-sharing safeguards after NCLAT ruling

The tribunal’s core principle: User choice + revocable consent

In the order, NCLAT underlined the “core principle” driving its reasoning, restoring user choice. Quoting its earlier findings, the tribunal reiterated: “We need to note that the core principle is to remove exploitation by restoring user choice. Users must retain the right to decide what data is collected, for which purposes, and for how long. Any non-essential collection or cross-use (like advertising etc.) can occur only with the concerned user's express and revocable consent.”

The tribunal also reproduced its findings on abuse under the Competition Act, including:

“Imposition of unfair or discriminatory conditions on users, through a ‘take it or leave it’ policy…”and that cross-platform sharing enhanced advantage in the display advertising market, creating entry barriers for rivals.

’Mismatch’ between findings and operative order

After hearing the parties and reviewing the record, NCLAT said it found ‘a mismatch between findings in our judgment and the conclusions/orders which is the operative part.’

The tribunal noted that while it had set aside the five-year advertising ban in para 247.1 earlier (for lack of rationale), its broader findings repeatedly stated that even advertising-type cross-use needed express, revocable consent and therefore the remedy architecture had to reflect that.

Read On: WhatsApp privacy case: NCLAT lifts CCI’s 5-year data-sharing ban but retains penalty

Key clarification: Delete “except 247.2.1”

NCLAT held that it had inadvertently set aside the wording that ensured transparency obligations would apply for advertising-related sharing too, and therefore ordered a correction:

“Accordingly, in our conclusions and order the words ‘except 247.2.1’ shall stand deleted.”

That matters because para 247.2.1 requires policy-level disclosure and purpose-linking:

“WhatsApp’s policy should include a detailed explanation of the user data shared with other Meta Companies or Meta Company Products. This explanation should specify the purpose of data sharing, linking each type of data to its corresponding purpose.”

The tribunal said allowing an “exception” here would misalign with the very principle it had upheld, and would effectively create a carve-out for advertising uses.

WhatsApp/Meta opposed: This is review, not clarification

WhatsApp and Meta opposed the application, arguing there was no ambiguity and that CCI was effectively seeking a review. They also pointed to optional-feature scenarios like CTWA (Click-to-WhatsApp ads), claiming users can avoid them. They further relied on prior NCLAT rulings in other regimes to argue clarification cannot modify directions.

NCLAT rejected these objections on jurisdiction, pointing to the Competition Act provision:“Section 53-O… (2)… (f) reviewing its decisions;”

It also said the cited IBC decisions were ‘of no assistance’ in a Competition Act matter.

On the optional-feature argument, NCLAT said it was not entering into ‘specific scenarios’ but emphasised that optionality must include the ability to opt out at any stage, and that this aligns with the core principle.

Read On: WhatsApp’s ‘Take-It-Or-Leave-It’ privacy policy an abuse of dominance, CCI tells NCLAT

Final direction and timeline

NCLAT allowed CCI’s application and issued the operative clarification:

“Remedial directions contained in Paras 247.2.1 to Paras 247.2.4… will apply to WhatsApp user data collection and sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including non-advertising and advertising purposes”.

WhatsApp is allowed three months to comply. The order is dated December 15, 2025, signed by Justice Ashok Bhushan (Member Judicial) and Arun Baroka (Member Technical).