NCLAT Clarifies WhatsApp-CCI Data Sharing Case

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has issued a landmark clarification in the ongoing dispute between WhatsApp LLC and the Competition Commission of India (CCI) concerning data sharing under WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy.

In I.A. No. 6817 of 2025 filed in Competition Appeal (AT) No. 1 of 2025, the CCI sought clarification on whether remedial directions upheld by NCLAT would also apply to advertising-related data sharing by WhatsApp and Meta.

The Tribunal has now clarified that all remedial directions apply to advertising-related data sharing, reinforcing user choice and transparency.

Background of the WhatsApp-CCI Dispute

The controversy stems from WhatsApp’s 2021 Privacy Policy, which required users to accept expanded data sharing with Meta as a condition for continued use of the messaging service.

CCI’s Original Findings (18 November 2024)

  • WhatsApp abused its dominant position under Section 4(2)(a)(i) by imposing unfair and coercive conditions on users.
  • Meta violated Section 4(2)(c) by leveraging WhatsApp user data to deny market access to competitors in online display advertising.
  • Remedies imposed by CCI:
    • Para 247.1: A five-year ban on using WhatsApp user data for advertising.
    • Paras 247.2.1–247.2.4: Transparency, consent, and opt-out obligations for non-advertising data sharing.

NCLAT Judgment Dated 4 November 2025

When WhatsApp and Meta challenged the CCI order, NCLAT:
  • Upheld findings of abuse of dominance.
  • Set aside the five-year advertising ban (Para 247.1), calling it disproportionate and lacking legal justification.
  • Upheld Paras 247.2.1–247.2.4, requiring:
    • Detailed disclosure of data-sharing practices.
    • Opt-in/opt-out choices for users.
    • Revocable consent mechanisms.
    • Transparency on purpose and scope of data collection.
The Tribunal emphasized that the core principle is restoring user choice, not imposing blanket prohibitions.

Why Did CCI Seek Clarification?

CCI argued that:
  • Although the five-year ban was removed, NCLAT repeatedly stated that “any non-essential collection or cross-use (like advertising) requires express and revocable user consent.”
  • Therefore, remedial directions under Paras 247.2.1–247.2.4 should apply to all non-WhatsApp purposes, including advertising.

Arguments by WhatsApp and Meta

  • Claimed no ambiguity exists; Para 247.1 was set aside entirely.
  • A clarification cannot expand obligations or revisit conclusions.
  • Advertising-related data sharing occurs only through optional features, and access to WhatsApp is not conditional on consenting to such features.

NCLAT’s Clarification (15 December 2025)

The Tribunal found a mismatch between its findings and operative order and clarified:
“Remedial directions in Paras 247.2.1 to 247.2.4 apply to WhatsApp user data collection and sharing for all non-WhatsApp purposes, including advertising and non-advertising.”
Additionally:
  • Deleted the phrase “except 247.2.1” from the operative part.
  • Granted WhatsApp three months to comply.

Legal Significance

  • Reinforces user autonomy and transparency as the cornerstone of competition remedies.
  • Affirms that any non-essential data collection or cross-use (including advertising) can occur only with express and revocable consent.
  • Aligns with compliance timelines under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) and DPDP Rules, 2025.

FAQs

Q1. Does WhatsApp still need user consent for advertising-related data sharing? Yes. All non-essential data use, including advertising, requires express and revocable consent.

Q2. Why was the five-year ban removed? Because it lacked justification and user-choice remedies were deemed sufficient.

Q3. What is the compliance timeline? WhatsApp has three months to implement changes.

Conclusion

The NCLAT’s clarification ensures that user choice and transparency apply universally, including advertising-related data sharing. This ruling sets a precedent for tech giants operating in India and underscores that competition law remedies must be proportionate, reasoned, and rooted in user autonomy.

Reference:

NCLAT Order dated 15/12/2025: WhatsApp LLC vs Competition Commission of India & Ors.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.