Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Ithaca Ice Works Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1950

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Ithaca Ice Works Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1950

The proposed $10,000 penalty was appropriate because, although mitigating factors existed, the eleventh respondent cooperated later than the tenth respondent, had a much stronger asset position, and was younger; the proposed $10,000 costs order reflected additional costs incurred by the applicant in prosecuting the matter to date.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding for Pecuniary Penalty and Restraining Orders for Ancillary Involvement in Contraventions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 / Orders and Reasons for Judgment on Proposed Consent Orders Concerning the Eleventh Respondent
Outcome
Orders made in terms of the proposed minutes of order attached to the joint submissions of the applicant and eleventh respondent.
Legal Topics
['restrictive Trade Practices' 'anti Competitive Arrangements or Understandings' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'injunctions or Restraining Orders' 'costs']
['competition Law' 'trade Practices'] ['restrictive Trade Practices' 'anti Competitive Arrangements or Understandings' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'injunctions or Restraining Orders' 'costs']

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

Federal Court Proceeding for Pecuniary Penalty and Restraining Orders for Ancillary Involvement in Contraventions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 / Orders and Reasons for Judgment on Proposed Consent Orders Concerning the Eleventh Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What penalty should be imposed on the eleventh respondent for ancillary involvement in contraventions of sections 45(2)(a)(i) and 45(2)(a)(ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.' 'Whether the proposed consent restraining order and costs order against the eleventh respondent were appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed $10,000 penalty was appropriate because, although mitigating factors existed, the eleventh respondent cooperated later than the tenth respondent, had a much stronger asset position, and was younger; the proposed $10,000 costs order reflected additional costs incurred by the applicant in prosecuting the matter to date.

Court Disposition

Orders made in terms of the proposed minutes of order attached to the joint submissions of the applicant and eleventh respondent.

Orders

  • ['A penalty of $10,000 was imposed on the eleventh respondent in respect of his ancillary involvement in the contraventions of sections 45(2)(a)(i) and 45(2)(a)(ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 alleged in paragraph 49 of the statement of claim.' 'The penalty is to be paid to the Commonwealth of Australia in two...