Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | [2009] FCAFC 32,2009-0320 FCA A |
| Date | 2009 |
| Year | 2009 |
| Court | Full Federal Court (Australia) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
16 cases
- Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd
-
Hastwell v Kott Gunning
...control and the court can modify or release a person from it: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32; (2009) 174 FCR 547 at [47] (Mansfield, Kenny and Middleton JJ). It must follow that if a person seeks access to material for use other th......
-
Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 14)
...156 Attorney-General (NSW) v Stuart (1994) 34 NSWLR 667 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32; 174 FCR 547 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v P Dawson Nominees Pty Ltd [2008] FCAFC 123; (2008) 169 FCR 227 Australian Compet......
-
Tommy on behalf of the Yinhawangka Gobawarrah v State of Western Australia (No 2)
...86F, 87, 87A, Pt 11 Div 3, 203AD, 251A, 251B Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32; 174 FCR 547 Australian Workers’ Union v Registered Organisations Commissioner [2019] FCA 309; 164 ALD 214 AWB Ltd v Cole (No 5) [2006] FCA 12......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
-
Transparency Vs. Privilege: Balancing Competing Public Interests In Respect Of Witness Statements
...FSR 91 as well as a decision of the Australian Federal Court in Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes (2009) 254 ALR 198. Second, and alternatively, Primeo argued that if the Previous Statements were privileged at the time of exchange, service of the Previous St......
-
Cartel Confessions: The Gift That Keeps On Giving?
...should not deter companies from taking advantage of the leniency policy. The Full Federal Court has held in ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes [2009] FCAFC 32 that the ACCC could not claim professional privilege over a number of witness statements (which it held as a consequence of its investigation ......
-
Is Evidence Served In Earlier Proceedings Covered By Litigation Privilege?
...by the Full Bench of the Federal Court of Australia in Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32 and Justice White Buzzle Operations v Apple Computer Australia [2009] NSWSC 225 have each ruled that a party will not be able to maintain litigat......
4 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...Schweppes Pty Ltd (2009) 174 FCR 547, 346 ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] ATPR 42-285, 346 ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32, 346 ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd 254 ALR 198, 346 ACCC v Leahy Petroleum Pty Ltd (No 3) (2005) ATPR 42-052, 344 ACCC v Leahy Petroleum Pty......
-
Table of Cases
.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16Australian Competition and ConsumerCommission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd[2009]FCAFC 32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336–341Ayat v Société Air France US Dist LEXIS 31285,CCH ProdLiab Rep P17730 (2007) . . . . . . . 184B, Re......
-
International Mass Actions and Class Actions - B. Australia
...exist about the circumstances in which the information may be disclosed to others. 77. See, e.g., ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 32; (2009) 174 FCR 547; 254 ALR 198; [2009] ATPR 42-285 ACCC v Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.R.L. (Formerly Pirelli Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.P.......
-
The Service of Witness Statements and Litigation Privilege: ACCC v Cadbury
...was that whistleblowers, such asdoi:10.1350/ijep.2009.13.4.334336 (2009) 13 E&P 336–341 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF1 [2009] FCAFC 32 (hereafter ‘ACCC vCadbury’).2 See, e.g., C. Tapper, Cross & Tapper on Evidence (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2007) 484; I. Grainger,‘Wit......