Trade Practices Commission v Leslievale Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 134

Trade Practices Commission v Leslievale Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 134

The applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities, having regard to the gravity of the allegations, that any pleaded price-fixing arrangement or understanding was made or arrived at between the respondents or any of them. The evidence about the meeting was vague and conflicting, there was substantial contrary evidence, and the alleged arrangement made little commercial sense given Mr. Zelinski's refusal to sell at the suggested prices. Because no arrangement or understanding was proved, the s.45(2) contravention case failed; in any event, Mobil's direction to its agent was found to have been prompted by observed prevailing prices rather than by implementation of any perceived...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 1986
Procedural Posture
Application Claiming Pecuniary Penalties for Alleged Contraventions of S.45(2) of the Trade Practices Act, 1974 and Injunctive Relief / Final Judgment and Orders Dismissing the Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['price Fixing Agreement' 'arrangement or Understanding Restricting Competition' 'substantial Lessening of Competition' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'standard of Proof']
['trade Practices' 'competition Law'] ['price Fixing Agreement' 'arrangement or Understanding Restricting Competition' 'substantial Lessening of Competition' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'standard of Proof']

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 Claiming Pecuniary Penalties for Alleged Contraventions of S.45(2) of the Trade Practices Act, 1974 and Injunctive Relief / Final Judgment and Orders Dismissing the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether at or as a result of the 3 February 1984 meeting an arrangement or understanding was made or arrived at between two or more respondents about minimum petrol prices in Gladstone.' 'Whether the alleged arrangement or understanding fixed, controlled or maintained petrol prices within ss.45(2) and 45A of the Trade Practices Act, 1974.' "Whether Mobil Oil Australia Limited was implicated through its representative's knowledge of, or conduct following, the alleged arrangement or understanding." 'Whether an understanding under s.45 requires an element of mutual commitment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities, having regard to the gravity of the allegations, that any pleaded price-fixing arrangement or understanding was made or arrived at between the respondents or any of them. The evidence about the meeting was vague and conflicting, there was substantial contrary evidence, and the alleged arrangement made little commercial sense given Mr. Zelinski's refusal to sell at the suggested prices. Because no arrangement or understanding was proved, the s.45(2) contravention case failed; in any event, Mobil's direction to its agent was found to have been prompted by observed prevailing prices rather than by implementation of any perceived...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to this application to be taxed."]