Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Baxter Healthcare Pty Ltd
| Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Baxter Healthcare Pty Ltd | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Court | High Court of Australia |
| Full case name | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Baxter Healthcare Pty Limited & Ors |
| Decided | 29 August 2007 |
| Citation(s) | [2007] HCA 38, (2007) 232 CLR 1 |
| Transcript(s) | [2007] HCATrans 202 (15 May 2007) |
| Case history | |
| Prior action(s) | ACCC v Baxter Healthcare [2005] FCA 581; ACCC v Baxter Healthcare [2006] FCAFC 128 |
| Subsequent action(s) | ACCC v Baxter Healthcare [2008] FCAFC 141 |
| Case opinions | |
|
(5:1:1) The immunity of governments from the restrictive trade practices provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 does not extend to trading corporations that provide goods or services to the government (per Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Crennan JJ; Callinan J dissenting and Kirby J deciding on different grounds) |
|
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon and Crennan JJ |
(5:1:1) The immunity of governments from the restrictive trade practices provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 does not extend to trading corporations that provide goods or services to the government (per Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne, Heydon and Crennan JJ; Callinan J dissenting and Kirby J deciding on different grounds)
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Baxter Healthcare Pty Ltd, (Baxter) was a decision of the High Court of Australia, which ruled on 29 August 2007 that Baxter Healthcare Proprietary Limited, a tenderer for various government contracts, was bound by the Trade Practices Act 1974 (TPA, Australian legislation governing anti-competitive behaviour) in its trade and commerce in tendering for government contracts. More generally, the case concerned the principles of derivative governmental immunity: whether the immunity of a government from a statute extends to third parties that conduct business with the government.
The High Court's judgment marked a successful appeal for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the Australian regulator of anti-competitive conduct, having lost at first instance and on appeal in the Federal Court of Australia. The ACCC was again successful when the case was remitted to the Federal Court for reconsideration, ending eight years of litigation between the parties. The High Court's judgment was received as a significant precedent in the law of derivative governmental immunity in Australia.
Baxter Healthcare Proprietary Limited (Baxter), was the Australian subsidiary of the multinational health care company Baxter International. Baxter manufactured intravenous (IV) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) fluids at various plants in Australia. Because of the cost of importing sterile IV fluids and the absence of a rival domestic producer, Baxter was a monopoly supplier of sterile IV fluids in the Australian market. Its monopoly covered large volume parenteral fluids, irrigating solutions and parenteral nutrition fluids. However, Baxter faced competition in the market for peritoneal dialysis fluids (PD fluids).
...
Wikipedia