ACCC v PT Garuda Indonesia Limited (FCAFC)
Federal Court of Australia (Full Court)
Justices Dowsett, Yates (dissenting) and Edelman
ACCC v P T Garuda Indonesia Ltd [2016] FCAFC 42 (21 March 2016)
Finding: Appeal upheld by majority
Related judgments
High Court of Australia [2017] HCA 21 (14 June 2017)
Trial: ACCC v Air New Zealand Limited [2014] FCA 1157 (31 October 2014)
Penalty (Air NZ): ACCC v Air New Zealand Limited (No 15) [2018] FCA 1166 (27 June 2018)
Penalty (Garuda): ACCC v P.T. Garuda Indonesia Ltd (Remedies) [2019] FCA 786 (30 May 2019)
Issues: Price fixing - arrangement or understanding - market in Australia - substantial lessening of competition
Catchwords
TRADE PRACTICES – price fixing – meaning of a market “in Australia” – whether markets for airborne cargo out of Hong Kong, Singapore and Indonesia to ports in Australia were markets “in Australia” within s 4E of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – whether inconsistency exists between Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and Air Navigation Act 1920 (Cth)
Legislation
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) - s 4E - s 45 - s 45A
In brief
The ACCC claimed that Air NZ and Garuda had been involved in price fixing in relation to certain fuel surcharges. The trial judge held that there was no 'market in Australia' and dismissed the case. The ACCC appealed (press release). On 21 March 2016, the Full Federal Court, by majority, upheld the appeals (ACCC v P T Garuda Indonesia Ltd [2016] FCAFC 42).
The majority noted that the issues were not complex and that the central issue was the meaning of a market ‘in Australia’.
Post
A further appeal to the High Court was dismissed.