Australian Broadcasting Commission v. Parish, R.J. & Ors being the members of the Australian Cricket Board [1980] FCA 1

Australian Broadcasting Commission v. Parish, R.J. & Ors being the members of the Australian Cricket Board [1980] FCA 1

The applicant failed to establish a sufficient probability of being entitled to final relief because of doubts as to whether the parties were in competition at the relevant times, uncertainty as to the relevant market, and unsuitability of the claim for interlocutory relief given unresolved legal questions. The Beecham test for interlocutory relief was not satisfied.

Parties
Applicant: Australian Broadcasting Commission; First to Fourteenth Respondents: Robert James Parish and others being the members of the Australian Cricket Board; Fifteenth Respondent: PBL Marketing Pty Limited; Sixteenth Respondent: World Series Cricket Pty Limited; Seventeenth Respondent: Publishing and Broadcasting Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 January 1980
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Application for Interlocutory Relief
Outcome
Application for interlocutory relief dismissed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Trade Practices, Exclusive Dealing, Interlocutory Injunctions
Competition Law Restrictive Trade Practices Exclusive Dealing Interlocutory Injunctions

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australian Broadcasting Commission

Applicant

Robert James Parish and others being the members of the Australian Cricket Board

First to Fourteenth Respondents

PBL Marketing Pty Limited

Fifteenth Respondent

World Series Cricket Pty Limited

Sixteenth Respondent

Publishing and Broadcasting Limited

Seventeenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Application for Interlocutory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agreement between Australian Cricket Board and company respondents contains an exclusionary provision under Section 45 and Section 4D of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the agreement has the purpose or effect of substantially lessening competition within the meaning of Section 45
  3. 3 Whether the facts justify granting interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish a sufficient probability of being entitled to final relief because of doubts as to whether the parties were in competition at the relevant times, uncertainty as to the relevant market, and unsuitability of the claim for interlocutory relief given unresolved legal questions. The Beecham test for interlocutory relief was not satisfied.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory relief dismissed

Orders

  • The application for interlocutory relief is dismissed.