ACCC v Techtronic [2023]
Federal Court of Australia
[2023] FCA 1574
Justice Colvin
Full citation
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Techtronic Industries Australia Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1574
Summary
The Court determined that the respondent engaged in RPM on 97 occasions. The conduct involved agreements that dealers would not sell or offer to sell Milwaukee brand power tools for a price less than that specified by the respondent.
The Court ordered that the respondent pay pecuniary penalties totaling $15 million. Tehe respondent was also ordered to pay a contribution to the ACCC costs and to established a revised education, training and compliance program. IT was further ordered to send letters to dealers informing them of the court orders.
Catchwords
COMPETITION - application for relief for respondent's breach of s 48 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) - resale price maintenance - where respondent wholesale supplier contravened s 48 on 128 occasions - where following mediation parties filed a joint statement of agreed facts and joint submissions - where joint submissions substantially accepted - where respondent did not allow retailers to supply products below 'cost price' where such a price was above the acquisition price - where respondent continued to engage in conduct following commencement of proceedings - where admission of liability substantially delayed from commencement of proceedings - where conduct not deliberate attempt to flout law - where legal advice had been sought - consideration of loss leader selling - declaratory relief, pecuniary penalties, injunctive relief, compliance probation order and corrective orders made as sought made - pecuniary penalty of $15,000,000 imposed - respondent ordered to contribute $400,000 to applicant's legal fees
Legislation cited
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 48, 96, 98
Cases cited
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Pattinson [2022] HCA 13; (2022) 274 CLR 450
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v High Adventure Pty Limited [2005] FCAFC 247
Australian Energy Regulator v EnergyAustralia Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 644
Commonwealth of Australia v Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate [2015] HCA 46; (2015) 258 CLR 482
Kadkhudayan v WD & HO Wills (Aust) Ltd [2002] FCAFC 110
Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; (2005) 228 CLR 357
Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2012] FCAFC 20
Trade Practices Commission v Orlane Australia Pty Ltd (1984) 1 FCR 157
Media and commentary