Trade Practices Commission v Tubemakers of Australia Ltd & Ors [1983] FCA 209

Trade Practices Commission v Tubemakers of Australia Ltd & Ors [1983] FCA 209

Because the conduct of each corporate respondent was closely linked to essentially one arrangement or understanding, a single penalty for each was appropriate. Penalties were determined with regard to the circumstances of the contraventions, the roles of the parties involved, their lack of prior contravention history, steps taken to comply with the Act, lack of loss or damage to others, and financial consequences. Injunctions were refused as further breaches were considered unlikely, and penalties were deemed sufficient to deter future contraventions.

Parties
Applicant: Trade Practices Commission; First Respondent: Tubemakers of Australia Limited; Second Respondent: Steel Supplies (Aust) Pty. Limited; Third Respondent: Barry Neil Bint
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 1983
Procedural Posture
Restrictive Trade Practices—pecuniary Penalties Application / Penalty Determination and Final Orders
Outcome
Pecuniary penalties imposed; costs awarded to applicant; injunction refused
Legal Topics
Restrictive Trade Practices, Pecuniary Penalties, Attempt to Contravene S.45(2)(a), Inducement to Contravene S.45(2)(a), Penalty Apportionment, Injunction
Competition Law Restrictive Trade Practices Pecuniary Penalties Attempt to Contravene S.45(2)(a) Inducement to Contravene S.45(2)(a) Penalty Apportionment Injunction

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trade Practices Commission

Applicant

Tubemakers of Australia Limited

First Respondent

Steel Supplies (Aust) Pty. Limited

Second Respondent

Barry Neil Bint

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Restrictive Trade Practices—pecuniary Penalties Application / Penalty Determination and Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a single or multiple penalties should be imposed for contraventions linked to one arrangement or understanding
  2. 2 Appropriateness of pecuniary penalties under s.76 of Trade Practices Act 1974
  3. 3 Factors relevant to penalty determination and apportionment

Ratio Decidendi

Because the conduct of each corporate respondent was closely linked to essentially one arrangement or understanding, a single penalty for each was appropriate. Penalties were determined with regard to the circumstances of the contraventions, the roles of the parties involved, their lack of prior contravention history, steps taken to comply with the Act, lack of loss or damage to others, and financial consequences. Injunctions were refused as further breaches were considered unlikely, and penalties were deemed sufficient to deter future contraventions.

Court Disposition

Pecuniary penalties imposed; costs awarded to applicant; injunction refused

Orders

  • Tubemakers of Australia Limited to pay a pecuniary penalty of $15,000 to the Commonwealth of Australia in respect of particular contraventions and judgment entered for the applicant for $15,000 under s.77.
  • Steel Supplies (Aust) Pty. Limited to pay a pecuniary penalty of $10,000 to the Commonwealth of Australia in respect of specified contraventions and judgment entered for the applicant for $10,000 under s.77.