Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 FEBRUARY 2016

The need for reciprocity and commitment breaks egg cartel case

The ACCC failed when it alleged that AECL attempted to enter into an agreement or understanding to limit egg production.

AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
Douglas Thompson
Douglas Thompson
Elizabeth Richmond
Elizabeth Richmond
Author LinkedIn connections

Key Points:

The case against the Australian Egg Corporation Limited floundered on the lack of reciprocity or commitment in the context of a prescribed arrangement or understanding.

It's eggstraordinary, but the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has recently failed in an action brought against the Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL), three directors and two egg companies, alleging an attempt to enter into an agreement or understanding to limit egg production (ACCC v Australian Egg Corporation Limited [2016] FCA 69).

The case concerned a perceived oversupply of eggs, coupled with a meeting of egg producers and the industry body, the AECL. While the ACCC demonstrated the participants at the so-called "crisis meeting" in January 2012 intended to take action to address the issue of an oversupply of eggs in the Australian market, the Federal Court found that the ACCC had not proved that the conduct was an attempt to make an agreement or

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from