The limits of competition : reasserting a role for consumer protection and fair trading regulation in competitive markets

In this paper we advocate for the continued need for consumer protection and fair trading regulation, even in competitive markets. For the purposes of this paper a ‘competitive market’ is defined as one that has low barriers to entry and exit, with homogenous products and services and numerous suppliers. Whilst competition is an important tool for providing consumer benefits, it will not be sufficient to protect at least some consumers, particularly vulnerable, low income consumers. For this reason, we argue, setting competition as the ‘end goal’ and assuming that consumer protection and consumer benefits will always follow, is a flawed regulatory approach. The ‘end goal’ should surely be consumer protection and fair markets, and a combination of competition law and consumer protection law should be applied in order to achieve those goals.

Dublin Docklands Development Authority architectural concept competition for a landmark tower/U2 studio

The U2 Tower competition entry involved the architectural design for a landmark office tower with associated head office for the world acclaimed rock band U2. The selected site for the office tower was located on the banks of the river Liffey, Dublin. The tower design was intended as a signifier or gateway to the docklands and the city itself. The proposed design incorporated a podium level for music retail and a media centre, a concourse level including cafeteria and outdoor areas as well as a commercial tower.

Strategic entry deterrence : does it constitute a misuse of market power?

A challenge for regulators and the courts has been establishing the boundary between behaviour is exclusionary and should be condemned under s 46 of the then Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA), now s 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA), and behaviour that is not exclusionary and might even be pro-competitive. This boundary can be especially difficult to draw in the case of entry deterring strategies. Section 46(1) prohibits corporations with a substantial degree of market power from taking advantage of that market power for one of the statutorily proscribed purposes which include preventing the entry of a person into that or any other market. Section 45(2) separately prohibits corporations from making and giving effect to contracts arrangements and understandings that have the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in a market. The latest case in which the ACCC has failed to satisfy the s 46 criteria is the decision of Greenwood J in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 909 (Cement Australia case). Final orders were published in a separate judgment, in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 148 (28 February 2014). The case concerned an entry deterring strategy, namely the pre-emptive buying of input factors in an upstream market to protect an incumbent with substantial market power in a downstream market and to prevent new entry in the downstream market. Greenwood J found that while Cement Australia Pty Ltd, formerly known as Queensland Cement Ltd (QCL), had substantial market power, its conduct in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was not a contravention of s 46, because Cement Australia had not “taken advantage” of its market power. However, since Cement Australia’s purpose in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was anti-competitive, they were held to contravene s 45(2) of the TPA. The purpose of this Note is to consider only the reasons for judgment in the Cement Australia case in relation to the “taking advantage” element. The judgment was handed down on 10 September 2013. The final hearing date was 15 July 2011, so it was long-awaited. At 714 pages, it is carefully drafted.

Hiring Graduates: Perspectives from Advertising and Public Relations Employers

This paper looks at employer expectations of advertising and public relations graduates seeking an entry level position. For employers in both disciplines, the top three priorities are the same generic skills – communications skills, personality traits and strategic or analytical thinking. However, some significant differences were observed, with PR practitioners assigning more importance to practical aspects such as experience in the field and internships. Public relations employers also tend to think that advertising graduates require less strategic skills than public relations graduates. Advertising practitioners generally considered the skills of entry level recruits to be more consistent across the two disciplines.