On Monday, October 22, Uber announced it will appeal a decision by Singapore’s antitrust watchdog that its merger with Grab violated the city-state’s competition laws, reported Reuters.
Uber stated it was making the appeal independently of Grab, as a matter of principle. Separately, Grab announced it would not appeal the regulator’s decision.
The CCCS’s ruling that the transaction led to a substantial lessening of competition, and that Uber had intentionally breached the law, was “unsupported and incorrect,” Uber claimed in a statement.
Uber asked the CCCS to annul its fine and claimed the regulator had used a very narrow definition of the ride-hailing market.
Uber disputed the CCCS’s allegation that Uber knew that the transaction infringed the law, but nevertheless moved ahead. “To the contrary, our view has always been that in a properly defined market – including at the very least ride-sharing, street-hail taxis and new entrants – the transaction respects the law and does not raise significant concerns,” it stated.
Featured News
SEC Enforcement Chief Margaret Ryan Steps Down After Six Months
Mar 16, 2026 by
CPI
India’s CCI Prepares Action on Potential Anti-Competitive Conduct in AI Sector
Mar 16, 2026 by
CPI
Proposal Calls for Treating Digital Platform Design Standards Like Physical Infrastructure
Mar 16, 2026 by
CPI
Europe’s Cybersecurity Clock Is Ticking. Here’s What Companies Need to Know
Mar 16, 2026 by
CPI
European Publishers and Startups Call for Swift EU Decision in Google Case
Mar 16, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Behavioral Economics
Feb 22, 2026 by
CPI
Behavioral Antitrust in 2026
Feb 22, 2026 by
Maurice Stucke
Behavioral Economics in Competition Policy: Going Beyond Inertia and Framing Effects
Feb 22, 2026 by
Annemieke Tuinstra & Richard May
Agreeing to Disagree in Antitrust
Feb 22, 2026 by
Jorge Padilla
Recognizing What’s Around the Corner: Merger Control, Capabilities, and the New Nature of Potential Competition
Feb 22, 2026 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece