NZME LTD v COMMERCE COMMISSION [2018] NZHC 216

NZME LTD v COMMERCE COMMISSION [2018] NZHC 216

Leave to appeal was granted because the proposed appeal raises novel and important questions of law about the scope of the Commerce Commission's jurisdiction to consider non-economic, unquantified plurality detriments under s67(3), and because s97(2) factors (questions of law, importance to parties and public, and significant money at issue) were satisfied.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 216
Parties
First Appellant: NZME Limited; Second Appellant: Fairfax Media Limited; Third Appellant: Stuff Limited; Respondent: Commerce Commission
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
22 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal Under the Commerce Act 1986 / High Court Grant of Leave Application (s97)
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal granted
Legal Topics
Authorisation Under S67(3), Plurality Concerns, Quality Detriments, Likelihood and Attribution of Detriments, Balancing Unquantified Detriments and Quantified Benefits, Leave to Appeal (s97)
Competition Law Administrative Law Media Law Statutory Interpretation Authorisation Under S67(3) Plurality Concerns Quality Detriments Likelihood and Attribution of Detriments +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NZME Limited

First Appellant

Fairfax Media Limited

Second Appellant

Stuff Limited

Third Appellant

Commerce Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal Under the Commerce Act 1986 / High Court Grant of Leave Application (s97)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commerce Commission may lawfully take non-economic, unquantified detriments (plurality concerns) into account when applying s67(3) of the Commerce Act 1986
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in law or fact in treating the Commission's identified unquantified quality and plurality detriments as "likely" and attributable to the transaction
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in law or fact in its approach to balancing unquantified detriments against net quantified benefits of the transaction

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because the proposed appeal raises novel and important questions of law about the scope of the Commerce Commission's jurisdiction to consider non-economic, unquantified plurality detriments under s67(3), and because s97(2) factors (questions of law, importance to parties and public, and significant money at issue) were satisfied.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal granted

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal granted on the three questions as set out in the draft notice of appeal