Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MAY 2017

The no adverse costs order proposal: Access to justice for small business or an impractical utopian ideal?

HHG Legal Group
Explore more from HHG Legal Group

This new Bill ostensibly supports small businesses to stand up against anti-competitive behaviour of multinationals.

AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
Murray Thornhill
Murray Thornhill
Author LinkedIn connections

Supporting small business growth has become a widely articulated agenda within the Australian political arena. The government and opposition and some minor parties have recently maintained a robust stance on anti-competitive behaviour of large multinational corporations and their effect on small businesses. On 11 May 2017, Parliament commenced the second reading debate of the Labor Party initiated, and Xenophon supported Competition and Consumer Legislation Amendment (Small Business Access to Justice) Bill 2017 (Bill). The Bill proposed to:

  1. Enable a small business to request a no adverse costs order at any stage of the small business' Court action seeking to prove that a large company had engaged in anti-competitive market action. To obtain this order, the small business must prove that the:

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.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Australia Moves To Ban Unfair Non-competes, No-poach Agreements, And Wage-fixing Arrangements

The Australian government is consulting on legislation that would treat certain employment-related restrictive covenants and inter-business labor market agreements as cartel conduct, while banning other clauses outright. The proposed bill extends Australia's cartel framework to no-poach and wage-fixing provisions between any employers, and prohibits non-compete clauses for most employees, with severe penalties for non-compliance including fines and potential jail time for individuals.
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
A&O Shearman
A&O Shearman
Article

Merger Reform Update: Critical Amendments To Australia’s Merger Regime Passed By Parliament

Australia's Parliament has passed critical amendments to the country's new merger regime, replacing automatic voiding of non-notified acquisitions with a court-supervised model and clarifying control exemptions for minority investments. The changes also introduce greater flexibility for stale clearances, though questions remain about whether further reforms are needed to address the regime's underlying complexity and conservative thresholds.
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Article

Australia’s Merger Regime Changes Again: Parliament Fine-tunes New M&A Rules

Australia's Parliament has passed significant amendments to the country's merger regime, less than a year after its introduction. The changes address practical concerns around mandatory merger notifications, providing greater flexibility for minority investments, reducing risks from inadvertent notification failures, and allowing extensions for delayed transactions. How will these refinements impact dealmakers navigating Australia's interventionist competition framework?
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
Holding Redlich
Holding Redlich
Article

Key Refinements To Streamline Australia's Merger Control Regime Passed Into Law: Threshold For Control Increased, Removal Of Voiding Provisions And Changes To "Stale" Notification Timelines

Australia's mandatory merger control regime undergoes significant refinement through new legislation that addresses practical challenges businesses have faced since its 2026 introduction. The amendments fundamentally reshape how control and associate relationships are assessed, what happens when acquisitions aren't properly notified, and how parties can manage completion timelines for approved mergers.
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
K&L Gates
K&L Gates
Article

Attempt Is Enough: Record Personal Penalty Signals ACCC’s Zero Tolerance For Cartel Conduct

The Federal Court has imposed a record $1 million personal fine on an executive for attempting to induce competitors into cartel arrangements in the oil and gas services industry, despite all five attempts failing. The Court also issued a non-indemnification order preventing the executive from using insurance or company funds to pay the penalty, marking a significant escalation in competition law enforcement.
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
Cooper Grace Ward
Cooper Grace Ward
Article

Competition And Consumer Law Round-Up

This edition of the K&L Gates Competition and Consumer Law Round-Up examines recent enforcement actions by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, including greenwashing allegations, misleading pricing investigations, and record penalties for horticulture code breaches. The newsletter also covers significant merger reviews, authorisations for industry collaborations, and emerging regulatory developments affecting digital platforms and supply chain disruptions.
AustraliaAntitrust/Competition Law
K&L Gates
K&L Gates
Article

When A Signed Will Is Not Enough: What A Recent Supreme Court Decision Says About Online Estate Planning.

A NSW Supreme Court decision reveals that even a properly signed and professionally drafted Will can fail if the process doesn't adequately establish that the document reflects the testator's true intentions. The case examines the critical distinction between document preparation and comprehensive estate planning, particularly relevant as online Will services become increasingly common.
AustraliaFamily and Matrimonial
HHG Legal Group
HHG Legal Group
Article

Buying Property With Friends Or Family? Why Your Ownership Structure Matters.

Buying property with friends or family can make home ownership more achievable, but it also creates important legal and financial obligations. Before buying, consider whether to own the property as joint tenants or tenants in common, how each person will contribute to costs, what happens if someone wants to sell or can no longer make payments, and how each owner’s interest will be dealt with if they die or want to sell. A co-ownership agreement can document each owner’s rights and responsibilities and establish a process for managing changes or disputes.
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
HHG Legal Group
HHG Legal Group