New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 27

Legal area

Court

1 Jul 2016

COMMERCE COMMISSION v BAYLEY CORPORATION LTD [2016] NZHC 1493

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1493
Court

High Court

The Court declared Bayley had contravened s 27 via s 30 and accepted the parties' agreed $2.2m penalty as within the appropriate range after assessing seriousness (large market players, senior decision‑makers, substantial market impact, six‑month duration), potential gain, and comparable authorities, and applying a 45% aggregate discount for early admission and cooperation; deferred payment until 31 December 2016 with statutory interest was permitted on the evidence and without Commission objection.
22 Dec 2015

COMMERCE COMMISSION v PGG WRIGHTSON LTD [2015] NZHC 3360

Citation

[2015] NZHC 3360
Court

High Court

PGW participated in three concerted arrangements (tagging fee, yard fee, RFID administration fee) that fixed prices in breach of ss 27 and 30 of the Commerce Act 1986; having assessed culpability, the starting point agreed by parties ($3,400,000–$4,300,000) was appropriate, a 25% discount for early acceptance of liability was warranted, and applying totality the Court imposed a single pecuniary penalty of NZD 2,700,000 and made a declaration of contravention.
6 Nov 2015

Deller v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 334
Court

District Court

The Court quashed the respondent's revocation/suspension decision because the s117 threshold for terminating benefits was not met and entitlements should continue; however the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that his current mental condition is a mental injury caused by the 2002 physical injury under s27, so the reviewer's decision denying cover for mental injury was upheld.
21 Dec 2012

THE COMMERCE COMMISSION V SINGAPORE AIRLINES CARGO PTY LTD HC AK CIV 2008-404-8356

Citation

openlaw-367ff285_2c90_4950_95ae_1766aaa85a3a.pdf
Court

High Court

Court accepted that SIA Cargo engaged in deliberate, sustained cartel conduct (entry into and giving effect to FSAs and SSAs) that warranted a significant penalty; having established an appropriate starting point comparable to recent airline precedents, applied a 20% discount for mitigating factors (admission, cooperation, compliance programme, absence of senior management involvement) and imposed the agreed aggregate penalty of $4.1 million plus costs as within the proper range and necessary for deterrence.
27 Jul 2012

COMMERCE COMMISSION V EMIRATES HC AK CIV 2008-404-8349

Citation

openlaw-d16af90c_f1a9_4726_9263_0557ec12d21c.pdf
Court

High Court

Court accepted the parties' agreed starting range of $1.8–$2.3 million for the combined offences, applied a 25% discount for admissions, cooperation, limited commercial gain, remorse and compliance improvements, and held the agreed aggregate pecuniary penalty of $1.5 million was within the appropriate range and thus ordered it together with awarded costs.
29 Jun 2012

THE COMMERCE COMMISSION V JAPAN AIRLINES CO LIMITED HC AK CIV 2008-404-8348

Citation

openlaw-3da79553_7c5c_453e_a3b6_b51391be2ab2.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court found JAL had entered into and given effect to the FSU and SSU in breach of ss27 and 30; having regard to seriousness, duration, seniority of participants, modest commercial gain, comparative authorities, and mitigating factors including admission, cooperation and compliance measures, the appropriate combined starting point was assessed at NZ$3.1-3.9 million and a 35% discount for mitigation was justified, producing and endorsing the agreed pecuniary penalty of NZ$2,275,000 and the agreed costs orders.
5 Apr 2011

COMMERCE COMMISION V CARGOLUX AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL S.A. HC AK CIV-2008-404-8355

Citation

openlaw-81150cf4_4626_4115_9570_8dd1a54aac31.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court accepted the parties' methodology: establish a starting point reflecting seriousness ($8.5–14.5m for combined conduct), apply mitigating discounts (33% for early admission and cooperation), and apply the totality principle, concluding the agreed pecuniary penalty of $6,000,000 was within the permissible range and should be approved, with payment by two instalments permitted in the circumstances.
5 Apr 2011

COMMERCE COMMISSION V BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC HC AK CIV-2008-404-8347

Citation

openlaw-aff8f5ee_74ce_42fe_b146_b111ad4ef585.pdf
Court

High Court

The Court accepted the parties' agreed starting point of $2.5–3.0 million for serious, sustained cartel conduct affecting air cargo fuel surcharges, applied a 40% reduction for early admission and substantial cooperation, found the agreed penalty of $1.6 million (plus $100,000 costs) to be within the permissible range and appropriate to achieve deterrence, and approved that order despite commercial gain being not readily ascertainable.