The Federal Court recently handed down its decision in the long running petrol price-fixing case involving service station operators in Geelong1. The ACCC brought proceedings against 8 companies and 10 individuals over allegations that they fixed retail petrol prices in the Geelong area in contravention of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (“the TPA”).
The respondents were alleged to have entered into arrangements or understandings (via telephone) to increase petrol prices. During those discussions it was alleged that the timing and amount of the petrol price rise was discussed.
Despite admissions by a number of respondents that the telephone calls took place, the ACCC’s claim failed because there was no commitment by the respondents to fix prices, just discussions to pass on information regarding prices. Accordingly, these discussions did not amount to an arrangement or understanding to fix petrol prices in breach of the TPA.
The ACCC has said that the decision will not deter it from investigating price fixing in the future and is said to be looking at different measures to gain information and evidence of price fixing activity.
Additional considerations for business
- While the ACCC was not successful in this case, it is always useful for businesses to bear in mind the price fixing provisions of the TPA, in particular that it is not necessary for a binding agreement to exist for price fixing to occur and nor does there need to be anything recorded in writing. Even informing competitors of proposed price changes or supplying price lists to them may amount to price fixing. These cases often turn on their facts and the evidence that is provided.
- Also, there is an ACCC immunity policy which aims to provide incentives for people to report price fixing conduct. The immunity provides protection against civil proceedings instituted by the ACCC if they are the first person to approach the ACCC and the other requirements of the immunity policy are met.
For further information, please contact: