Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cambur Industries Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 1027

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cambur Industries Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 1027

Cambur Industries contravened s 48 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by engaging in resale price maintenance through eight acts concerning Pete N Peppa over about 16 months and four acts concerning Tabletop and Kitchen over about three-and-a-half years; Mr Caulfield was directly and knowingly concerned in and party to those contraventions. Considering the deliberate and extended conduct, involvement of senior management, lack of prior compliance systems, likely but unquantified loss to retailers and consumers, small company size, relatively small market share, absence of prior findings, lack of profit, cooperation and admissions, and the new compliance programme, pecuniary penalties...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Orders Under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) Concerning Resale Price Maintenance / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Respondents Admitted the Substantive Allegations; Determination of Declarations, Pecuniary Penalties, Injunctions, Costs and Further Submissions on Undertaking and Time to Pay
Outcome
Pecuniary penalties fixed; declarations made; injunctions refused; costs ordered against the respondents; further submissions directed on the terms of Cambur Industries' compliance programme undertaking and the time for payment of penalties.
Legal Topics
['resale Price Maintenance' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'declarations' 'injunctive Relief' 'compliance Programme Undertaking' 'accessory Liability']
['competition and Consumer Law' 'trade Practices'] ['resale Price Maintenance' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'declarations' 'injunctive Relief' 'compliance Programme Undertaking' 'accessory Liability']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders Under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) Concerning Resale Price Maintenance / Reasons for Judgment and Orders After Respondents Admitted the Substantive Allegations; Determination of Declarations, Pecuniary Penalties, Injunctions, Costs and Further Submissions on Undertaking and Time to Pay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What pecuniary penalties should be imposed on Cambur Industries Pty Ltd and Mr John James Caulfield under s 76 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).' 'What form of declarations should be made for contraventions of s 48 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).' 'Whether injunctive relief should be granted against the respondents under s 80 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).' "Whether the Court should accept Cambur Industries' proffered undertaking to maintain a compliance programme in its proposed terms." 'Whether further submissions were required about the time for payment of the pecuniary penalties.']

Ratio Decidendi

Cambur Industries contravened s 48 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) by engaging in resale price maintenance through eight acts concerning Pete N Peppa over about 16 months and four acts concerning Tabletop and Kitchen over about three-and-a-half years; Mr Caulfield was directly and knowingly concerned in and party to those contraventions. Considering the deliberate and extended conduct, involvement of senior management, lack of prior compliance systems, likely but unquantified loss to retailers and consumers, small company size, relatively small market share, absence of prior findings, lack of profit, cooperation and admissions, and the new compliance programme, pecuniary penalties...

Court Disposition

Pecuniary penalties fixed; declarations made; injunctions refused; costs ordered against the respondents; further submissions directed on the terms of Cambur Industries' compliance programme undertaking and the time for payment of penalties.

Orders

  • ['Cambur Industries pay to the Commonwealth of Australia a pecuniary penalty in the sum of $280,000.' 'Mr Caulfield pay to the Commonwealth of Australia a pecuniary penalty in the sum of $32,000.' "Cambur Industries and Mr Caulfield pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the proceeding to be agreed or...