Trade Practices Commission v. T.N.T. Management Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 19

Trade Practices Commission v. T.N.T. Management Pty Ltd & Ors [1985] FCA 19

While the Commission established that arrangements or understandings were made or entered into by certain defendants at various meetings not to deal with Tradestock and similar intermediaries, the arrangements were not shown to be in restraint of trade or commerce in the common law sense or to have had or be likely to have a significant effect on competition between the defendants. Consequently, no arrangement or understanding contravened s.45(2) or s.45(2)(b), and no effect was given to a proscribed arrangement or understanding.

Parties
Plaintiff: Trade Practices Commission; First Defendant: T.N.T. Management Pty. Limited; Second Defendant: Brambles Holdings Limited; Third Defendant: Mayne Nickless Limited; Fourth Defendant: Youngs Transport Pty. Limited; Fifth Defendant: Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty. Limited; Sixth Defendant: Express Freight Pty. Limited; Seventh Defendant: Associated Steamships Pty. Limited; Eighth Defendant: Eslea Holdings Limited, formerly Ipec Holdings Limited; Ninth Defendant: Roadswift Transport Pty. Limited, formerly Interstate Parcel Express Co. Pty. Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 1985
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Practices Act, Arrangements in Restraint of Trade, Substantial Effect on Competition, Exclusionary Provision, Market Definition
Competition Law Trade Practices Act Arrangements in Restraint of Trade Substantial Effect on Competition Exclusionary Provision Market Definition

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 6 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trade Practices Commission

Plaintiff

T.N.T. Management Pty. Limited

First Defendant

Brambles Holdings Limited

Second Defendant

Mayne Nickless Limited

Third Defendant

Youngs Transport Pty. Limited

Fourth Defendant

Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty. Limited

Fifth Defendant

Express Freight Pty. Limited

Sixth Defendant

Associated Steamships Pty. Limited

Seventh Defendant

Eslea Holdings Limited, formerly Ipec Holdings Limited

Eighth Defendant

Roadswift Transport Pty. Limited, formerly Interstate Parcel Express Co. Pty. Limited

Ninth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants made or entered into arrangements or understandings in restraint of trade or commerce contrary to s.45 of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether such arrangements or understandings had or were likely to have a significant effect on competition between the defendants
  3. 3 Whether effect was given to those arrangements or understandings before or after 1 July 1977

Ratio Decidendi

While the Commission established that arrangements or understandings were made or entered into by certain defendants at various meetings not to deal with Tradestock and similar intermediaries, the arrangements were not shown to be in restraint of trade or commerce in the common law sense or to have had or be likely to have a significant effect on competition between the defendants. Consequently, no arrangement or understanding contravened s.45(2) or s.45(2)(b), and no effect was given to a proscribed arrangement or understanding.

Court Disposition

proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • The proceedings be dismissed.
  • The question of costs is reserved.