A toothless chihuahua? : the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, neoliberalism and supermarket power in Australia

During the Senate Inquiry into 'milk price wars' in 2011, Senator Nick Xenophon accused the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) of being 'less effective than a toothless Chihuahua'. This follows the ACCC's lack of action regarding the reported abuse of market power of Australia's supermarket duopoly, where an extensive inquiry into the competitiveness of retail prices in 2008 found grocery retailing to be 'workably competitive' despite numerous claims to the contrary. How can farmers' submissions to the inquiry that cite market abuse be reconciled with the ACCC's finding that all is well in the food supply chain? Following an in-depth examination of 53 farmer submissions to the inquiry, we conclude that the findings of the ACCC are commensurate with the neoliberal economisation of the political sphere, where commercial entities 'legitimately' govern beyond their corporate boundaries, often using disciplinary measures that were once exclusive to governments. We argue that such clear structural inequalities between farmers and major corporations is reason to re-regulate markets and reinsert a stronger role for government to 'level the playing field'.

Building an effective trade practices commission : the role of Professor Robert Baxt AO

Bob Baxt, the third Chairman of the Trade Practices Commission, served for a single three year term from 1988 to 1991. He followed Bob McComas, who had deliberately adopted a non-litigious approach to preserving the competitive process, believing that he understood business as an insider and that much of what it did was not anti-competitive, when correctly viewed. Baxt was far more pro-active in his approach, and more closely aligned with that of the first Chairman, Ron Bannerman. Baxt sought to push the frontiers of investigation and precedent, and perhaps, more significantly, sought to influence his Ministers, the government, public servants and public opinion about the need to expand the coverage of the Trade Practices Act, increase penalties and properly resource the Commission so that it could perform its assigned roles. This article examines Baxt’s early and on-going role in teaching Australian students and professionals through his interdisciplinary Trade Practices Workshops, the political context of Baxt’s tenure, including his relations with the Attorney-General ,Michael Duffy, and his skilful handling of the Queensland Wire case.

Joint ventures and the Competition and Consumer Act

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse the way in which joint venture agreements can fall within the competition provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and the circumstances in which authorisation may be available for joint venture collaborations.

Regulating unilateral supermarket misconduct as customer/acquirer of goods and services

Supermarkets in Australia may have substantial market power as buyers in wholesale markets for grocery products. They may also have substantial bargaining power in negotiating contracts with their suppliers of grocery products. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) regulates misconduct by supermarkets as customer/acquirers in three ways. First, s 46(1) of the CCA prohibits the ‘taking advantage’ of buyer power for the purpose of damaging a competitor, preventing entry or deterring or preventing competitive conduct. Secondly, s 21 of the ACL prohibits unconscionable conduct in business–to–business transactions. Thirdly, Pt IVB of the CCA provides for the promulgation of mandatory and voluntary industry codes of conduct. Since 1 July 2015 the conduct of supermarkets as customer/acquirers has been regulated by the Food and Grocery Industry Code of Conduct. This article examines these three different approaches. It considers them against the background of the misconduct at issue in ACCC v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd which the ACCC chose to litigate as an unconscionable conduct case, rather than a misuse of market power case. The article also considers the strengths and weaknesses of each of the three approaches and concludes that while the three approaches address different problems there is scope for overlap and all three should be retained for compete coverage.

Commercial vulnerability of tenant : a special disadvantage?

The Full Federal Court has once again been called upon to explore the limits of s51AA of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) in the context of a retail tenancy between commercially experienced parties. The decision is Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Samton Holdings Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 62.

Enforceable undertakings : a new mechanism for minimum labour standards’ enforcement

Regulatory commentators have identified the need for more responsive regulation to allow enforcement agencies to respond to different types and degrees of non-compliance. One tool considered to support responsive enforcement is the Enforceable Undertaking (EU). EUs are used extensively by Australian regulators in decisions that forego litigation in exchange for offenders promising to (amongst other things) correct behaviour and comply in the future. This arguably allows regulatory agencies greater flexibility in how they obtain compliance with regulations. EUs became an additional enforcement tool for the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) under the Fair Work Act 2009. This paper is a preliminary exploration of the comparative use of EUs by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the FWO to assess their effectiveness for the minimum labour standards' environment.

Love hurts: The costly reality of online romance fraud

Online dating and romance scams continue to lure in Australians with figures this week showing people have lost more than A$23 million this year alone, with average individual losses at A$21,000 – three times higher than other types of fraud. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) set up the Scam Disruption Project in August to help target those it believes have been caught in such scams. Over three months it sent 1,500 letters to potential victims in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. The figures released this week show that 50 people have been scammed, losing a total A$1.7 million – that’s an average of A$34,000 per victim. Almost three quarters of the scams were dating and romance related, which saw it evolve into the number one category of fraud victimisation. Romance scams continue to pose a problem – despite the efforts of the police and ACCC – so why is it that people continue to fall for them?

How to tackle cybercrime before people even know they're a victim

An estimated A$75,000 is lost by Australians everyday to online fraud, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). Given that this is based on reported crime, the real figure is likely to be much higher. It is well known that fraud, particularly online fraud, has a very low reporting rate. This also doesn’t even begin to encompass non-financial costs to victims. The real cost is likely to be much, much higher. There are many challenges to policing this type of crime, and victims who send money to overseas jurisdictions make it even harder, as does the likelihood of offenders creating false identities or simply stealing legitimate ones. But despite these challenges police have started to do something to prevent the impact and losses of online fraud. By accessing financial intelligence, police are able to identify individuals who are sending money to known high-risk countries for fraud. They then notify these people with their suspicions that they may be involved in fraud. In many cases the people don’t even know they may be victims or involved in online fraud.

Policing online fraud in Australia: The emergence of a victim‐oriented approach

Online fraud is a global problem. Millions of individuals worldwide are losing money and experiencing the devastation associated with becoming a victim of online fraud. In 2014, Australians reported losses of $82 million as a result of online fraud to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). Given that the ACCC is one of many agencies that receives victim complaints, and the extent of under‐reporting of online fraud, this figure is likely to represent only a fraction of the actual monetary losses incurred. The successful policing of online fraud is hampered by its transnational nature, the prevalence of false/stolen identities used by offenders, and a lack of resources available to investigate offences. In addition, police are restricted by the geographical boundaries of their own jurisdictions which conflicts with the lack of boundaries afforded to offenders by the virtual world. In response to this, Australia is witnessing the emergence of victim‐oriented policing approaches to counter online fraud victimisation. This incorporates the use of financial intelligence as a tool to proactively notify potential victims of online fraud. Using a variety of Australian examples, this paper documents the history to this new approach and considers the significance that such a shift represents to policing in a broader context. It also details the value that this approach can have to both victims and law enforcement agencies. Overall, it is argued that a victim‐oriented approach to policing online fraud can have substantial benefits to police and victims alike.

Standardisation and patent ambush : potential liability under Australian competition law

This article examines the problem of patent ambush in standard setting, where patent owners are sometimes able to capture industry standards in order to secure monopoly power and windfall profits. Because standardisation generally introduces high switching costs, patent ambush can impose significant costs on downstream manufacturers and consumers and drastically reduce the efficiency gains of standardisation.This article considers how Australian competition law is likely to apply to patent ambush both in the development of a standard (through misrepresenting the existence of an essential patent) and after a standard is implemented (through refusing to license an essential patented technology either at all or on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) terms). This article suggests that non-disclosure of patent interests is unlikely to restrained by Part IV of the Trade Practices Act (TPA), and refusals to license are only likely to be restrained if the refusal involves leveraging or exclusive dealing. By contrast, Standard Setting Organisations (SSOs) which seek to limit this behaviour through private ordering may face considerable scrutiny under the new cartel provisions of the TPA. This article concludes that SSOs may be best advised to implement administrative measures to prevent patent hold-up, such as reviewing which patents are essential for the implementation of a standard, asking patent holders to make their licence conditions public to promote transparency, and establishing forums where patent licensees can complain about licence terms that they consider to be unreasonable or discriminatory. Additionally, the ACCC may play a role in authorising SSO policies that could otherwise breach the new cartel provisions, but which have the practical effect of promoting competition in the standards setting environment.

Unfair terms in residential land contracts : will the Australian consumer law improve a buyer’s bargaining position?

The prohibition on unfair contract terms in standard form consumer contracts has the potential to significantly impact on the terms of contracts for the sale of land. The definition of ‘consumer contract’ includes contracts for the sale or grant of an interest in land to an individual wholly or predominantly for personal or domestic use. Therefore, a contract for the purchase of a residence for personal occupation by the buyer, as opposed to a purchase for investment purposes, will be a consumer contract potentially attracting the application of the unfair terms provisions. Significant consumer protection mechanisms already exist in most state jurisdictions requiring disclosure of relevant matters to the buyer and providing remedies for the provision of misleading conduct. Minimal evidence of unfair terms in land contract was presented to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into the Australian Consumer Policy Framework raising the question as to whether there is an identified problem of unfair terms in real estate contracts and if so, whether the same economic and ethical rationales justify regulatory intervention. This article examines what effect if any the introduction of the unfair contract provisions will have on the enforcement of residential land contracts and the viability of previously accepted conditions if challenged as being “unfair terms”. The article concludes that despite the existence of several potentially unfair terms in some land contracts, the intervention of the rules of equity to overcome perceived hardship or unfairness to buyers from strict enforcement of terms means the unfair terms provisions are only likely to operate on terms untouched by those principles. In the authors’ view the scope for operation of the unfair terms provisions will be limited to terms untouched by the principles of equity and consumer protection legislation making it unlikely that there will be any significant realignment of the contractual obligations and rights of buyers and sellers of land.

The Australian Consumer Law

Reform of Australia’s inconsistent Commonwealth, State and Territory consumer laws is now a reality. The 1 January 2011 commencement of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, is the culmination of a long process of consultation. Unifying and rationalising the plethora of laws, this new Act sees the disappearance of the “Trade Practices Act” and the amendment of a raft of State and Territory legislation; the new national regime informed by them operates in their stead. This is indisputably the most comprehensive change in the history of the Trade Practices Act 1974. This book aims to assist practitioners, academics and students understand the Australian Consumer Law regime and its impact. It summarises the history and constitutional basis of the ACL, explaining how the ACL will be implemented, amended and enforced. In addition it explores how the various general and specific protections interrelate, and the scope of their overlap, and considers the content of the ACL, and the principal changes from the provisions of the Trade Practices Act.

The Australian Consumer Law (2nd ed.)

The purpose of this book is to summarise and explain the substantive rights of consumers, and the obligations of businesses under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Since the first edition there have been two significant legislative developments at the Federal and State level which have been incorporated into this edition. The Competition and Consumer Legislation Amendment Act 2011 (Cth), which amends the provisions of the ACL relating to unconscionable conduct, took effect from 1 January 2012. In addition to this the Fair Trading Act 1999 (Vic) has been replaced by the Australian Consumer Law and Fair Trading Act 2012 (Vic), which applies the ACL as a law of the State of Victoria.

Department of Social Services Options Paper : Options for Replacement Arrangements Following the Abolition of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission : Response

Submission in response to government options paper regarding arrangements for regulation of charities following abolition of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission.

Reforming the procurement of construction and financing of Australian infrastructure : advancing capacity, competition and investment

Funded by an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage grant over four years (2009–13), the Major Infrastructure Procurement project sought to find more effective and efficient ways of procuring and delivering the nation’s social and economic infrastructure by investigating constraints relating to construction capacity, competition, and finance in new public sector major infrastructure.1 The research team comprised researchers in construction economics and finance from Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Griffith University (GU), The University of Hong Kong (UHK), and The University of Newcastle (UoN). Project partners included state government departments and agencies responsible for infrastructure procurement and delivery from all Australian mainland states, and private sector companies and peak bodies in the infrastructure sector (see “Introduction” for complete list). There are a number of major outcomes from this research project. The first of these is a scientifically developed decisionmaking model for procurement of infrastructure that deploys a novel and state-of-the-art integration of dominant microeconomic theory (including theories developed by two Nobel Prize winners). The model has been established through empirical testing and substantial experiential evidence as a valid and reliable guide to configuring procurement of new major and mega infrastructure projects in pursuance of superior Valuefor- Money (VfM). The model specifically addresses issues of project size, bundling of contracts, and exchange relationships. In so doing, the model determines the suitability of adopting a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) mode.