Trade Practices Commission v Pioneer Concrete (Vic) Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 332

Trade Practices Commission v Pioneer Concrete (Vic) Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 332

The respondents knowingly made an arrangement or understanding to fix prices for pre-mixed concrete, the terms of which were refined over time, resulting in substantial price increases and lessening competition in the Melbourne market, in contravention of s.45(2)(a)(ii) and s.45A of the Trade Practices Act; pecuniary penalties and injunctions are therefore appropriate remedies.

Parties
Applicant: Trade Practices Commission; First Respondent: Pioneer Concrete (Vic.) Pty. Ltd.; Second Respondent: Apex Quarries Ltd.; Third Respondent: Boral Resources (Vic.) Pty. Ltd.; Fourth Respondent: The Readymix Group Ltd.; Fifth Respondent: Barro Group Pty. Ltd.; Sixth Respondent: Barry Montgomery; Seventh Respondent: William Roderick Parr; Eighth Respondent: Alan George Rasmussen; Ninth Respondent: Christopher John Avery; Tenth Respondent: John David Casey
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 1985
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Application granted; pecuniary penalties and injunctions ordered.
Legal Topics
Price Fixing, Trade Practices Act, Anti Competitive Conduct, Cartel Conduct, Pecuniary Penalties, Injunctions
Competition Law Price Fixing Trade Practices Act Anti Competitive Conduct Cartel Conduct Pecuniary Penalties Injunctions

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trade Practices Commission

Applicant

Pioneer Concrete (Vic.) Pty. Ltd.

First Respondent

Apex Quarries Ltd.

Second Respondent

Boral Resources (Vic.) Pty. Ltd.

Third Respondent

The Readymix Group Ltd.

Fourth Respondent

Barro Group Pty. Ltd.

Fifth Respondent

Barry Montgomery

Sixth Respondent

William Roderick Parr

Seventh Respondent

Alan George Rasmussen

Eighth Respondent

Christopher John Avery

Ninth Respondent

John David Casey

Tenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the respondents contravene s.45(2)(a)(ii) of the Trade Practices Act by making an arrangement or understanding to fix prices for pre-mixed concrete in Melbourne Metropolitan Area?
  2. 2 Should pecuniary penalties and injunctions be imposed for admitted price fixing conduct under the Act?

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents knowingly made an arrangement or understanding to fix prices for pre-mixed concrete, the terms of which were refined over time, resulting in substantial price increases and lessening competition in the Melbourne market, in contravention of s.45(2)(a)(ii) and s.45A of the Trade Practices Act; pecuniary penalties and injunctions are therefore appropriate remedies.

Court Disposition

Application granted; pecuniary penalties and injunctions ordered.

Orders

  • First respondent to pay a pecuniary penalty of $53,000 to the Commonwealth.
  • Second respondent to pay a pecuniary penalty of $47,000 to the Commonwealth.