Loading PDF...
This document is 624.3 KB. Do you want to load it?
Cited documents 4
Act
2|
Citizenship and Immigration
·
Education
·
Environment, Climate and Wildlife
·
Health and Food Safety
·
Human Rights
·
International Law
·
Labour and Employment
·
Public administration
|
|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
·
Human Rights
|
Judgment
2|
Reported
Section 67(1) is a condonable procedural time‑bar; first initiation (3 Nov 2010) triggered the three‑year period.
* Competition law – Interpretation of time‑bar – s67(1) Competition Act construed as a procedural time‑bar, not absolute prescription; capable of condonation under s58(1)(c)(ii).
* Procedural law – Tribunal powers – s58(1)(c)(ii) grants Tribunal express power to condone non‑compliance with time limits (subject to specified exceptions).
* Administrative procedure – complaint initiation – amendment of an initiation is permissible; first initiation date (3 Nov 2010) constituted trigger for s67(1).
* Constitutional law – access to courts (s34) – statutory interpretation must be constitutionally compliant and purposive.
|
|
Mentioning prices at an industry meeting without consensus does not establish a binding price‑fixing agreement under section 4(1)(b)(i).
Competition law – s 4(1)(b)(i) – agreement/price‑fixing – consensus required that parties regard arrangement as binding; mere mention/price signalling insufficient; reliance on draft minutes and minute‑takers’ notes; proof delimited by pleadings; limitation/s 67(1) – prescription; evidentiary value of subsequent conduct.
|