Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation[2009] FCAFC 32,2009-0320 FCA A
Date2009
Year2009
CourtFull Federal Court (Australia)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
15 cases
  • Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • Invalid date
  • Hastwell v Kott Gunning
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • 13 May 2021
    ...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)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 24 May 2021
    ...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)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 23 September 2019
    ...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......
  • Get Started for Free
3 firm's commentaries
  • Transparency Vs. Privilege: Balancing Competing Public Interests In Respect Of Witness Statements
    • Cayman Islands
    • Mondaq Cayman Islands
    • 28 November 2016
    ...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?
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 22 April 2009
    ...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?
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 15 July 2009
    ...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......
3 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Class Actions Handbook
    • 1 January 2018
    ...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......
  • International Mass Actions and Class Actions - B. Australia
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Antitrust Class Actions Handbook
    • 1 January 2018
    ...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
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 13-4, November 2009
    • 1 November 2009
    ...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......