Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 14 August 1974
Page: 921


Senator LAUCKE (South Australia) - Before this matter is finalised, I wish to express again my concern at the lack of clarity as to what constitutes insignificant restraint. Sub-clause (3) of clause 45 states:

A contract, arrangement or understanding is not in restraint or trade or commerce for the purposes of this Act if the restraint has a slight effect on competition between the parties to the contract, arrangement or understanding and on competition between those parties, or any of them, and other persons as to be insignificant.

I would like to ask the Attorney-General whether he can be more explicit as to what would constitute insignificant restraint. Can it be put in a numerical setting? The wording is, in my opinion, so airy-fairy as to give rise in the minds of businessmen to a complete lack of clearness as to what could constitute an illegal act. Surely this could be made more explicit than as it now appears in these very wordy lines in this amendment.







Suggest corrections