12 Oct 2011
COMMERCE COMMISSION V DEUTSCHE BAHN AG & ORS HC AK CIV-2010-404-005479
- Citation
- openlaw-1839752e_e38e_4606_8526_59803306e9a2.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The court held that s27(1) claims based on entry into agreements overseas against Kuehne + Nagel must be dismissed because Kuehne + Nagel did not carry on business in New Zealand and s4(1) does not extend the Act to such overseas entry; however the Commission established a good arguable case under r6.29(1)(a) that s27(2) claims (giving effect to provisions) for specified agreements could be attributed to the parent under s90(2)(b) because there was plausible evidence the New Zealand subsidiary implemented the surcharges at the direction or with the consent of group agents, so the court assume…