Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v NQCranes Pty Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Court: Federal Court
• Judgment Date: 20 October 2021
• Neutral Citation: [2021] FCA 1270
• Date: 20 October 2021

Federal Court of Australia

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v NQCranes Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 1270

File number:	NSD 1144 of 2020
Judgment of:	ABRAHAM J
Date of judgment:	20 October 2021
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to strike out pleadings under r 16.21 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) and/or s 37P of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – whether pleadings fail to disclose a reasonable cause of action – whether pleadings likely to cause prejudice, embarrassment or delay – whether pleadings are otherwise an abuse or process – application dismissed ; COMPETITION – alleged contravention of cartel provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) – consideration of meaning of “give effect to” under s 4 of the CCA and whether certain conduct, as pleaded, is capable of constituting “giving effect to” a “contract, arrangement or understanding” containing a cartel provision – consideration of whether a “contract, arrangement or understanding” is capable of being established on the facts as pleaded – Trade Practices Commission v Allied Mills Industries Pty Ltd (1980) 32 ALR 570 distinguished
Legislation:	Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 4, 44ZZRD(4), 45AD(4), 45AR(1) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M, 37P Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 6.01, 16.02, 16.02(2), 16.21 Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) r 23.02 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) rr 171, 171(3)
Cases cited:	Abela v Minister for Home Affairs [2021] FCA 96 Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Delor Vue Apartments CTS 39788 [2021] FCAFC 121 Allstate Life Insurance Co v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [1994] FCA 636; (1994) 217 ALR 226 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Air New Zealand Ltd [2014] FCA 1157; (2014) 319 ALR 388 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Cascade Coal Pty Ltd (No 3) [2018] FCA 1019 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Colgate Palm-Olive Pty Ltd (No 4) [2017] FCA 1590; (2017) 353 ALR 460 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Leahy Petroleum Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 794; (2007) 160 FCR 321 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Renegade Gas Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1135 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Yazaki Corporation [2018] FCAFC 73; (2018) 262 FCR 243 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Yazaki Corporation (No 2) [2015] FCA 1304; (2015) 332 ALR 396 Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd v Dampier Port Authority [2006] WASC 281; (2006) 33 WAR 82 Bartlett v Swan Television and Radio Broadcasters Pty Ltd [1995] ATPR 41-434 Batistatos v Roads & Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] HCA 27; (2006) 226 CLR 256 BHP Group Ltd v Impiombato [2021] FCAFC 93 Chandrasekaran v Commonwealth of Australia (No 3) [2020] FCA 1629 Charlie Carter Pty Ltd v The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association of Western Australia (1987) 13 FCR 413 Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union v Stanwell Corporation Ltd (No 3) [2014] FCA 1324 Fair Work Ombudsman v Eastern Colour Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 803; (2019) 209 IR 263 Faruqi v Latham [2018] FCA 1328 Forrest v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2012] HCA 39; (2012) 247 CLR 486 Fuller v Toms [2012] FCA 27; (2012) 247 FCR 440 Gall v Domino’s Pizza Enterprises Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCA 345; (2021) 304 IR 300 Imobilari Pty Ltd v Opes Prime Stockbroking Ltd [2008] FCA 1920; (2008) 252 ALR 41 Impiombato v BHP Group Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 1720 Kernel Holdings Pty Ltd v Rothmans of Pall Mall (Australia) Pty Ltd [1991] FCA 557; (1991) 217 ALR 171 Meckiff v Simpson [1968] VR 62 Parbery & Ors v QNI Metals Pty Ltd & Ors [2018] QSC 240 Pharm-a-Care Laboratories Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (No 3) [2010] FCA 361; (2010) 267 ALR 494 Plaintiff M83A-2019 v Morrison (No 2) [2020] FCA 1198 Polar Aviation Pty Ltd v Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2012] FCAFC 97; (2012) 203 FCR 32 Sabapathy v Jetstar Airways [2021] FCAFC 25 Spencer v Commonwealth [2010] HCA 28; (2010) 241 CLR 118 Thomson v STX Pan Ocean Co Ltd [2012] FCAFC 15 Wright Rubber Products Pty Ltd v Bayer AG [2008] FCA 1510 Trade Practices Commission v Allied Mills Industries Pty Ltd (1980) 32 ALR 570 Trade Practices Commission v TNT Management Pty Ltd (1985) 6 FCR 1 Trade Practices Commission v David Jones (Australia) Pty Ltd (1985) 7 FCR 109 Tradestock Pty Ltd v TNT (Management) Pty Ltd (No 2) [1978] FCA 1; (1978) 17 ALR 257 Uber Australia Pty Ltd v Andrianakis [2020] VSCA 186; (2020) 61 VR 580 Walton v Gardiner [1993] HCA 77; (1993) 177 CLR 378 White Industries Australia Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [2007] FCA 511; (2007) 160 FCR 298 Williams & Humbert v W & H Trade Marks (Jersey) Ltd [1986] AC 368 Wride v Schulze [2004] FCAFC 216
Division:	General Division
Registry:	New South Wales
National Practice Area:	Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area:	Economic Regulator, Competition and Access
Number of paragraphs:	93
Date of hearing:	26 July 2021
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr S White SC and Ms C Dermody
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Johnson Winter & Slattery
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr M Hodge QC and Ms S Marsh
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Wallace & Wallace Lawyers

ORDERS

		NSD 1144 of 2020
BETWEEN:	AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION Applicant
AND:	NQCRANES PTY LTD Respondent

order made by:	ABRAHAM J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 October 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The respondent’s amended interlocutory application, dated 8 March 2021, is dismissed.

2. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs, to be agreed or assessed.

3. The applicant has leave to amend its amended statement of claim, dated 22 February 2021, in respect to the matters identified in the reasons for judgment of Abraham J at [49] and [78].

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ABRAHAM J:

1. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), by its amended originating...