Rural Press Ltd v Australian Competition & Consumer Commission [2002] FCAFC 213

Rural Press Ltd v Australian Competition & Consumer Commission [2002] FCAFC 213

The arrangement between Rural Press, Bridge Printing, and Waikerie Printing constituted an understanding to withdraw River News from the Mannum area, communicated and implemented. However, as no particular class was specifically targeted as a boycott, the arrangement did not contain an exclusionary provision within s 4D. The arrangement did have the effect of substantially lessening competition in the Murray Bridge newspaper market, in breach of s 45(2)(a)(ii) and s 45(2)(b)(ii). There was no taking advantage of market power in breach of s 46, as the conduct (threat to enter another market) did not rely on market power in the Murray Bridge market. Individuals involved had actual knowledge...

Parties
First Appellant: Rural Press Limited; Second Appellant: Bridge Printing Office Pty Limited; Third Appellant: Ian Law; Fourth Appellant: Trevor McAuliffe; First Respondent: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission; Second Respondent: Waikerie Printing House Pty Limited; Third Respondent: Paul Taylor
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal / Full Court Judgment on Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Exclusionary Provisions, Substantial Lessening of Competition, Market Definition, Market Power, Accessory Liability, Pecuniary Penalties, Mandatory Injunction
Competition Law Exclusionary Provisions Substantial Lessening of Competition Market Definition Market Power Accessory Liability Pecuniary Penalties Mandatory Injunction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rural Press Limited

First Appellant

Bridge Printing Office Pty Limited

Second Appellant

Ian Law

Third Appellant

Trevor McAuliffe

Fourth Appellant

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

First Respondent

Waikerie Printing House Pty Limited

Second Respondent

Paul Taylor

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal / Full Court Judgment on Appeal From Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arrangement between regional newspaper publishers contravened s 45(2) and s 46 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the arrangement contained an exclusionary provision under s 4D
  3. 3 Whether the arrangement had the purpose or effect of substantially lessening competition under s 45

Ratio Decidendi

The arrangement between Rural Press, Bridge Printing, and Waikerie Printing constituted an understanding to withdraw River News from the Mannum area, communicated and implemented. However, as no particular class was specifically targeted as a boycott, the arrangement did not contain an exclusionary provision within s 4D. The arrangement did have the effect of substantially lessening competition in the Murray Bridge newspaper market, in breach of s 45(2)(a)(ii) and s 45(2)(b)(ii). There was no taking advantage of market power in breach of s 46, as the conduct (threat to enter another market) did not rely on market power in the Murray Bridge market. Individuals involved had actual knowledge...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declarations and orders based on contravention of s 46(1)(a) and s 46(1)(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) set aside
  • Declarations and orders based on contravention of s 45(2)(a)(i) and s 45(2)(b)(i) set aside