05 October 2004
Welcome to the October edition of Clayton Utz Competition Insights. In this edition we look at what the major parties are promising for reform of Australia’s competition law.
One important reform in competition law is the release of the ACCC’s informal merger guidelines. We’ll see what they are, and why they make early planning an ACCC strategy more important.
We’ll also look at a central problem in predatory pricing cases, which is applying a counterfactual test, particularly if the rationale for conduct in question is put to one side. Finally, when must claims for damages caused by cartel conduct be started? A current case could answer this difficult question.
By Joanne Daniels and Rob Shilkin.
Over the years we've looked at many proposed changes to competition law in Insights, and on the eve of the election we ask where do things stand now? Jo Daniels and Rob Shilkin give an overview of major proposed changes.
By Michael Corrigan and Rob Shilkin.
The new Guidelines reflect an attempt by the ACCC to ensure that the Australian system is rigorous, accountable and public, say Michael Corrigan and Rob Shilkin, and make early planning an ACCC strategy more important.
By Kirsten Webb.
Kirsten Webb looks at the competition law consequences of a firm of substantial market power employing a "fighting brand" strategy to compete against a rival, which sells its "fighting brand" below variable cost, while maintaining prices and margins on its leading brand.
By Bruce Lloyd.
A Full Court will soon be asked to rule whether the Trade Practices Act allows damages actions to be brought in respect of cartel conduct occurring over 20 years or more. Bruce Lloyd explains the implications.
