Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Bridgestone Corporation [2010] FCA 584

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Bridgestone Corporation [2010] FCA 584

The respondents, as admitted, engaged in cartel conduct by giving effect to provisions designed to fix prices, rig bids, allocate market share, and set minimum prices in the marine hose market in Australia, thereby contravening s 45(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). Declaratory and injunctive relief, together with substantial pecuniary penalties, are appropriate and necessary to mark court disapproval and deter future conduct, given the seriousness, deliberateness, senior management involvement, and significant value affected.

Parties
Applicant: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission; First Respondent: Bridgestone Corporation; Second Respondent: Dunlop Oil & Marine Limited; Third Respondent: Parker ITR S.R.L.; Fourth Respondent: Trelleborg Industries S.A.S.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Declarations of contravention made, injunctions granted, pecuniary penalties imposed, and costs ordered as sought by applicant and agreed by respondents.
Legal Topics
Cartel, Penalties, Declarations, Pecuniary Penalties, Trade Practices, Evidence on Admissions, Function of Pleadings
Competition Law Consumer Law Cartel Penalties Declarations Pecuniary Penalties Trade Practices Evidence on Admissions +1 more

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

Applicant

Bridgestone Corporation

First Respondent

Dunlop Oil & Marine Limited

Second Respondent

Parker ITR S.R.L.

Third Respondent

Trelleborg Industries S.A.S.

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents contravened s 45(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by giving effect to cartel arrangements
  2. 2 Appropriateness of declaratory relief on admissions
  3. 3 Determination of penalties for cartel conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents, as admitted, engaged in cartel conduct by giving effect to provisions designed to fix prices, rig bids, allocate market share, and set minimum prices in the marine hose market in Australia, thereby contravening s 45(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). Declaratory and injunctive relief, together with substantial pecuniary penalties, are appropriate and necessary to mark court disapproval and deter future conduct, given the seriousness, deliberateness, senior management involvement, and significant value affected.

Court Disposition

Declarations of contravention made, injunctions granted, pecuniary penalties imposed, and costs ordered as sought by applicant and agreed by respondents.

Orders

  • Declarations that each respondent contravened s 45(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
  • Injunctions restraining respondents from engaging in further contraventions