Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Tribunal liberates Victorian newsagents and sub-agents

Article Abstract:

The Australian Trade Practices Tribunal reversed the Trade Practices Commission's authorization of the Victorian newspaper and magazine distribution system proposed in Re 7-11 Stores Pty, Australian Ass'n of Convenience Stores Inc. and Queensland Newsagents Federation. Approval had been sought for a scheme that used exclusive newsagent, sub-agent and home delivery agreements that would constitute territorial monopolies under the Trade Practices Act 1974. The Tribunal found that the agreements would promote inefficiency and restrict economic opportunities.

Author: Corones, Stephen
Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1995
Exclusive dealing agreements, Periodical wholesalers, Newspaper and periodical wholesalers, Newspaper wholesalers, Newsstands

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Reaping without sowing: the free-rider problem in the context of joint ventures

Article Abstract:

The Australia Federal Court has ruled, in Dowling v Dalgety Australia Ltd, that parties to a joint venture can refuse access to third parties. Under the exclusionary provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (TPA), access that does not restrict competition cannot be denied except with permission from the Trade Practices Commission, but the court ruled otherwise. One solution to these conflicting interpretations would be to amend section 45 of the TPA to allow such exclusion unless it decreases competition unfairly in a market.

Author: Corones, Stephen
Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1993
Joint ventures

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Exercising contractual rights and imposing restrictive conditions - a misuse of market power?

Article Abstract:

Section 46(1) of the Australian Trade Practices Act of 1974 regulates the actions of a single firm to prevent restrictive conditions or contractual rights that are effective unfair competition. The courts have addressed this issue in many cases and they have carefully examined the specific circumstances and facts of each case before ruling. The firm being sued must have both a significant amount of market power and be abusing that market power to undermine competition before Section 46(1) applies.

Author: Corones, Stephen
Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1997
Regulation, Licensing, and Inspection of Miscellaneous Commercial Sectors, Restraint of Trade, Contracts, Non-competition agreements, Noncompete agreements

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Australia, Cases, Laws, regulations and rules, Unfair competition (Commerce), Unfair competition, Restraint of trade
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Shareholder derivative litigation and corporate governance. The corporate director's compliance oversight responsibility in the post Caremark era
  • Abstracts: Postal agents stamped by scandal; undertrained inspectors and their rogue informants help convict innocent workers
  • Abstracts: Will the president pardon his friends? His answers during the campaign for the presidency have been vague. But his power is absolute
  • Abstracts: Compulsory acquisition under Pt. 6A.2 and its implications for minority shareholders. (Australian competition policy.) (Editorial)
  • Abstracts: Are longer hours here to stay? Quality time losing out. See sea rider: kayaking off the coast makes the hours glide by
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.