The Federal Court has found that Clinica Internationale Pty Ltd (Clinica) and Mr Radovan Montague Laski, a director and the sole shareholder of Clinica, made false or misleading representations and engaged in unconscionable conduct in relation to a program allegedly offering permanent residency, in breach of the Australian Consumer Law, in proceedings brought by the ACCC.
Competition and Consumer Act 2010
The Full Court of the Federal Court today, by majority, upheld an appeal by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in relation to air cargo cartel allegations.
The Full Court found that price fixing conduct engaged in by PT Garuda Indonesia Ltd (Garuda) and Air New Zealand Ltd (Air NZ) relating to the imposition of agreed surcharges on the carriage of air cargo from ports outside Australia to destinations within Australia took place in a “market in Australia”, and consequently breached Australia’s price fixing laws.
The High Court of Australia has granted the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission special leave to appeal the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in relation to allegations that Flight Centre Travel Group Limited (Flight Centre) attempted to induce three international airlines to enter into price fixing arrangements in breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (now called the Competition and Consumer Act 2010) (the Act).
The east coast gas market has experienced a triple-whammy of local and international events and changes, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Chairman Rod Sims said today at the Australian Domestic Gas Outlook Conference in Sydney.
“First was the introduction of LNG with its huge impact on the demand for gas,” Mr Sims said.
“Second, oil prices have fallen faster and further than nearly anyone thought, which is reducing the incentive and ability to explore for gas.”
Chairman Rod Sims today announced the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s compliance and enforcement priorities at a CEDA event in Sydney.
“In the area of competition law, we will continue to take a strong line on cartel conduct, anti-competitive conduct and practices, and where we can, misuse of market power,” Mr Sims said.
“We have around 20 cartel investigations under way at any one time and we expect one or two criminal prosecutions this year and some other important civil proceedings.”
In his annual CEDA address, Chairman Rod Sims announces the ACCC’s compliance and enforcement priorities. Mr Sims outlines several new priorities and some continuing areas of focus in protecting consumers and small businesses. He also discusses key competition cases as well as the ACCC's approach to advocacy and market studies.
The Federal Court of Australia has found that Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL), Farm Pride Foods Ltd (Farm Pride) and Ironside Management Services Pty Ltd (trading as Twelve Oaks Poultry) (Twelve Oaks Poultry) did not attempt to induce a cartel arrangement, as alleged in proceedings brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.
The Court also found that Mr James Kellaway, the managing director of AECL, and Mr Jeffrey Ironside, a director of AECL and Twelve Oaks Poultry, did not attempt to induce egg producers to engage in cartel conduct.
Telecommunication services provider Voiteck Pty Ltd (Voiteck) has paid a penalty of $10,200 following the issue of an infringement notice by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.
The ACCC issued the infringement notice because it had reasonable grounds to believe that Voiteck had made false or misleading representations to residents of Lifestyle SA retirement villages about their right to choose a telecommunications services provider.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has commenced proceedings in the Federal Court against FDRA Pty Ltd (FDRA) (formerly known as Angel digital) and its shareholder and director Jackson Anni (also known as Temitope Ayodele Anifowose) alleging unconscionable conduct, false or misleading conduct, and breaches of the unsolicited consumer agreement provisions of the Australian Consumer Law in the supply of electronic tablet devices.
The Federal Court has ordered that Safety Compliance Pty Ltd (Safety Compliance) pay penalties totalling $515,000 for making false or misleading representations to small businesses in connection with the supply of safety wall charts and first aid kits.
In her judgment, Justice Farrell stated that Safety Compliance’s business model was “a systematic and deliberate scam targeted at potentially large numbers of people in small businesses across Australia.”