Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Boral Ltd [2001] FCA 30

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Boral Ltd [2001] FCA 30

BBM had a substantial degree of market power in the Melbourne concrete masonry products market and took advantage of that power for proscribed purposes by engaging in sustained predatory pricing and strategic plant upgrades, intended to eliminate or substantially damage competitors or prevent/deter their market...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court
Outcome
Partially allowed: appeal against dismissal of application against second respondent allowed; appeal against first respondent dismissed.
Legal Topics
['misuse of Market Power' 'predatory Pricing' 'market Definition' 'barriers to Entry' 'section 46 Trade Practices Act 1974']
['competition Law' 'trade Practices Act'] ['misuse of Market Power' 'predatory Pricing' 'market Definition' 'barriers to Entry' 'section 46 Trade Practices Act 1974']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From a Single Judge of the Federal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What is the relevant product market for section 46 analysis?' 'Did BBM have a substantial degree of market power?' 'Did BBM take advantage of its market power for a proscribed purpose under section 46?' 'Is recoupment or selling below cost a necessary element of predatory pricing under Australian law?']

Ratio Decidendi

BBM had a substantial degree of market power in the Melbourne concrete masonry products market and took advantage of that power for proscribed purposes by engaging in sustained predatory pricing and strategic plant upgrades, intended to eliminate or substantially damage competitors or prevent/deter their market entry or competitive conduct; a breach of section 46 was established, and recoupment is not a necessary element under Australian law.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed: appeal against dismissal of application against second respondent allowed; appeal against first respondent dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal against the dismissal of the application against the second respondent be allowed.' 'The orders of the trial judge, in relation to the second respondent, be set aside.' 'The proceeding be remitted to the trial judge for further hearing and determination in relation to the relief sought by the...