The Commerce Commission is filing an appeal against a High Court decision last month that limited the Commission's case in respect of a cartel in the cardboard box industry.  

The High Court at Auckland decided on 20 April 2011 to reduce the number of claims the Commission can pursue against the Australian packaging giant Visy Board Pty Ltd and its former general manager Rod Carroll. However, the decision allows the Commission to take to trial claims that Visy Board and Amcor Ltd fixed prices for a Fonterra tender, and were parties to an 'overarching' understanding to fix prices between them.  

"The Commission has decided to appeal this decision. The issue is important to us not only for this case, but because we believe the judgment is wrong in law and sets an unhelpful precedent for future enforcement cases," said Commerce Commission General Counsel for Enforcement Mary-Anne Borrowdale.

In the High Court ruling, Justice Paul Heath said that the Commission had demonstrated a plausible foundation for bringing a case on the Fonterra tender and the overarching understanding, and that there was a serious issue to be tried on the merits. Other claims were ruled to be outside the Commission's jurisdiction.

The Commission's case follows earlier proceedings by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, in which Visy and Mr Carroll admitted that they were parties to a cartel with their competitor Amcor in the corrugated packaging market.

The Federal Court of Australia imposed penalties of AU$36 million against Visy and its owner, Richard Pratt, and AU$500,000 against Mr Carroll.   But Visy and Mr Carroll deny that the cartel arrangements extended to New Zealand and objected to the Commission's ability to pursue its claims in New Zealand.  

As the case remains before the courts, the Commission can make no further comment at this time.

Background

Cartels are arrangements between competitors that breach Part II of the Commerce Act. Cartel conduct may include price fixing, excluding competitors, colluding on tenders, bid rigging and market sharing. Cartels usually operate informally and in secret. Cartel conduct is recognised as being a seriously damaging form of anti-competitive behaviour.