Meta-owned messaging application WhatsApp rolled out a privacy policy update in early 2021. What followed was a prolonged competition law dispute that moved from the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to the Delhi High Court (HC) and then repeatedly to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
Over several years, regulators and courts kept returning to the same core question: whether a dominant messaging service can require users to accept expanded data sharing as the price of continued access?
Notably, how regulators and courts approached that question changed over time. As such, here’s a detailed timeline of how the case unfolded since 2021:
January 2021: WhatsApp updates its privacy policy
The company introduced a revised privacy policy that expanded the scope of data sharing with other Meta entities. Users received prompts asking them to accept the updated terms in order to continue using the messaging service.
Notably, the update offered no meaningful opt-out. Those who declined risked losing access to the app altogether. Regulators later treated this take-it-or-leave-it framework as central to the case, particularly because the service functioned as a widely used and hard-to-replace mode of communication.
March 2021: CCI orders a suo motu investigation
The CCI took suo motu cognisance of the policy update and instructed its Director General to investigate under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act.
The CCI flagged concerns that the platform, given its dominant position in the messaging market, effectively forced users to accept expanded data sharing as a condition for continued access.
April 2021 to August 2022: Delhi HC allows the probe to proceed
WhatsApp and Meta challenged the CCI’s decision to investigate the 2021 privacy policy update before the Delhi HC. They argued that the issues raised by the CCI primarily concerned data protection and user privacy, which they claimed fell outside the scope of competition law and thereby the Commission’s jurisdiction.
In April 2021, a Delhi HC judge declined to interfere at the threshold stage. Notably, the court held that the CCI’s order under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act merely directed an investigation, and did not record any final findings against WhatsApp or Meta. And since the order did not determine rights or impose penalties, the court said it saw no reason to halt the probe at that stage.
Meta and WhatsApp appealed this decision. In August 2022, a division bench of the Delhi HC dismissed the appeals and reaffirmed the CCI’s power to investigate. The bench made it clear that competition law scrutiny is not excluded simply because a matter also raises questions of privacy or data protection. It reiterated that a Section 26(1) direction only sets the investigative process in motion, and does not prejudge the outcome.
Throughout this period, the 2021 privacy policy remained in effect. At the same time, the HC’s rulings removed procedural roadblocks, allowing the CCI to complete its investigation and move towards a final determination.
November 2024: CCI issues its final order
After completing the investigation, the CCI issued its final order against Whatsapp and Meta. The competition regulator held that the service abused its dominant position by imposing unfair and discriminatory conditions through the 2021 privacy policy. And it concluded that consent obtained where users lacked realistic alternatives could not qualify as freely given.
The regulator imposed a penalty of Rs. 213.14 crore on Meta. It also barred the messaging service from sharing user data with Meta companies for advertising purposes for five years, and directed the introduction of safeguards such as clear disclosures, purpose limitation, opt-out options, and revocable consent for other forms of data sharing.
Through this order, the CCI restricted advertising-related data sharing between WhatsApp and Meta companies as part of a broader set of behavioural remedies tied to dominance and user choice.
December 2024: Meta and WhatsApp appeal to NCLAT
Meta and WhatsApp challenged the CCI’s final order before the NCLAT. The appeal contested both the findings of abuse of dominance and the remedies imposed, including the restriction on advertising-related data sharing.
January 2025: NCLAT grants interim relief to WhatsApp
After hearing preliminary arguments, NCLAT granted interim relief. The Tribunal stayed the CCI’s restriction on advertising-related data sharing, signalling that it wanted to examine the scope and proportionality of the remedy more closely before allowing it to operate.
Advertisements
The interim relief applied only to the advertising-related restriction. NCLAT did not stay the entire CCI order, allowing the appeal to proceed on merits while preventing the five-year ban from taking effect during the proceedings.
This meant the messaging service could resume sharing user data with Meta for advertising purposes while the appeal remained pending, even as the broader findings on dominance and lack of user choice continued to face judicial scrutiny.
November 2025: NCLAT delivers its final judgment and CCI seeks clarification
NCLAT delivered its final judgment after detailed hearings on the appeals filed by Meta and WhatsApp. The Tribunal upheld the CCI’s finding that the messaging platform holds a dominant position in the relevant market, and also upheld the Rs. 213.14 crore penalty imposed on Meta.
At the same time, NCLAT set aside the five-year restriction on advertising-related data sharing imposed by the CCI. It also removed the CCI’s finding that the platform had unlawfully leveraged its dominance into Meta’s advertising ecosystem, holding that this aspect of the Commission’s reasoning did not sustain in the manner framed.
While the Tribunal preserved the core conclusion that the 2021 privacy policy exploited users’ lack of meaningful choice, the way it framed the operative directions introduced ambiguity. For context, by setting aside the advertising-related restriction, the judgment appeared to leave open whether the transparency, disclosure, and consent safeguards imposed by the CCI applied equally to advertising-related data sharing.
Later in November, the CCI approached NCLAT seeking clarification. The Commission argued that the operative portion of the judgment contained an inadvertent drafting error that did not fully reflect the Tribunal’s findings.
According to the CCI, if left uncorrected, the wording could allow advertising-related data sharing to operate without disclosure and consent safeguards, despite the Tribunal’s repeated emphasis on user choice and revocable consent across the judgment.
December 2025: NCLAT closes loophole in WhatsApp judgment
In December, NCLAT issued a clarification order addressing the CCI’s concerns. The Tribunal stated that it never intended to exempt advertising-related data from user-choice safeguards and acknowledged that its earlier operative wording had created confusion.
NCLAT clarified that disclosure, opt-out, and purpose-limitation requirements apply uniformly to all non-essential data sharing, including advertising-related data sharing with Meta companies. It also emphasised that once data originates from users of the messaging service, user rights attach to that data regardless of how Meta subsequently deploys it.
The Tribunal granted the platform three months to implement these safeguards, setting out the current legal position on how user data must be handled going forward.
Also Read:
Support our journalism by subscribing
For YouSource link
