Trade Practices Commission v Culley, Frank Thomas & Anor [1983] FCA 267
Although the respondents attempted to have a retailer increase petrol prices and attended meetings about stopping discounting, the attempt was unsuccessful, no threats were made, and no actual harm to the public occurred. Nonetheless, their conduct breached the Act and warrants a modest penalty to mark the Court's disapproval and deter similar conduct.
- Parties
- Applicant: Trade Practices Commission; First Respondent: Frank Thomas Culley; Second Respondent: Keith James Greenwell
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 October 1983
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Pecuniary Penalty / Penalty Determination
- Outcome
- Pecuniary penalties imposed; costs ordered against respondents.
- Legal Topics
- Restrictive Trade Practices, Attempt to Fix Prices, Retail Petrol Sales, Pecuniary Penalties
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Trade Practices Commission
Applicant
Frank Thomas Culley
First Respondent
Keith James Greenwell
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Pecuniary Penalty / Penalty Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents' conduct constituted an attempt to fix prices in breach of s.45(2)(a)(ii) of the Trade Practices Act 1974
- 2 What pecuniary penalty is appropriate under s.76(1) of the Act
Ratio Decidendi
Although the respondents attempted to have a retailer increase petrol prices and attended meetings about stopping discounting, the attempt was unsuccessful, no threats were made, and no actual harm to the public occurred. Nonetheless, their conduct breached the Act and warrants a modest penalty to mark the Court's disapproval and deter similar conduct.
Court Disposition
Pecuniary penalties imposed; costs ordered against respondents.
Orders
- The respondents each pay to the Commonwealth of Australia a pecuniary penalty of $500 in respect of the matters alleged against them in paragraph 8 of the Statement of Claim.
- The respondents each pay to the applicant one half of its costs of the application, to be taxed as one set of costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment