Natural meaning equals natural monopoly

Michael Gvozdenovic

Australian Business Law Review

Michael Gvozdenovic, ‘Natural meaning equals natural monopoly: new declaration criteria for access to services under the Competition and Consumer Act’ (2020) 48 ABLR 286

Introduction

The constructional choices arising from the recently amended s 44CA(1)(b) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) are a good example of the often indeterminate range of possible meanings available in interpreting a statutory instrument. While the "rules" of statutory interpretation are readily observed and have been authoritatively stated, the application of those principles does not foreclose this indeterminacy. For example, how does one balance an analysis of the text of the provision – a consideration given significant weight in cases concerned with the previous declaration criteria under Pt IIIA of the CCA – with an analysis of the provision's context and purpose, particularly in light of the "very large body of extrinsic material associated with" Australian competition law? [footnotes omitted]