Delhi HC To Examine If Terms Of Google's Advertising Bars Advertisers From Arbitration In India: Report

Justice Pratibha M Singh presided over a petition filed by Startupwala Private Limited against Google India Private Limited.

The dispute centres on the rejection of Startupwala's advertisements due to Google's 'Government Documents and Official Services' policy.

Source : Getty

The Delhi High Court has said it will examine whether Google's advertising programme terms unfairly limit advertisers' ability to pursue legal recourse or choose arbitration within India, news agency IANS reported on Friday. During the proceedings, Justice Pratibha M Singh presided over a petition filed by Startupwala Private Limited against Google India Private Limited. The petition contested the conditions surrounding the disapproval or labeling of their digital advertisements as 'Limited' by Google.

Startupwala has initiated legal proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, compelling Google India to restore all of the company's digital advertisements that were disapproved or designated as 'Limited' in December 2023 and January 2024. Furthermore, the action aims to prohibit Google from disapproving any remaining ads under similar classification, the IANS report added.

The dispute centres on the rejection of Startupwala's advertisements due to Google's 'Government Documents and Official Services' policy. Startupwala contests Clause 13 of the Advertisement Terms, which requires arbitration in Santa Clara County, California, USA. They argue that this provision effectively prevents them from seeking legal remedies in India, the report further added.

Justice Singh's directive to the tech giant prompts a comprehensive assessment of whether such a clause genuinely hinders Indian entities like Startupwala from exercising their legal rights or necessitates arbitration to take place within India. Google has been instructed to reply within two weeks. During this period, it is mandated that advertisements currently designated as 'Eligible (limited)' and not blocked should remain unaltered or removed.

The court's order specifies that the content of these advertisements must remain unchanged until the next hearing.

"The Respondent has not yet submitted a reply, and there are no reasons on record explaining why any of these advertisements were disapproved or marked as 'Eligible (limited)'," noted the court.

"Therefore, considering the potential irreparable harm to the petitioner and its business, the court directs that those advertisements currently not blocked and labeled as 'Eligible (limited)'... shall remain unblocked or removed until the next scheduled hearing," it further stated.