ACCC V Liquorland

Moreover, If you’re a company owner and you make a product you don’t want competition. But once about only ten percent of people in America own a business or company there is gonna be competition. As a consumer you want competition it forces the companies to make better goods and provide better services for cheaper more fair prices. Which then allows you to be able to buy more goods and services. Which then allows you to be more successful in life and achieve more goals and those goals faster.

a few, large firms dominate many Australian markets. A duopoly exists in the grocery market of Australia, where it is dominated by Coles and Woolworths, nationally. Both of these have extensive and wide distribution systems, with many stores in almost all in regional and urban areas across Australia. Other firms,

Lionel Bentley and Brad Sherman have, in their book; "Intellectual Property Law” acknowledged that indeed there is tension between competition law and intellectual property law. While discussing the effect of competition law on the exploitation of copyright , they state that a copyright entitles an owner to use the property in a manner which he or she so wishes and that the copyright owner cannot be compelled to apply their rights in a particular manner. This is the exclusivity of a right. They, however, acknowledge that there are circumstances in which competition law may require a property owner to make available the right for use by the public. They state that operators in dominant positions have a special responsibility not to allow their conduct to impair

The antitrust laws are the basis of this national policy. These laws, enforced by both the federal and state governments, require companies to compete in the marketplace. The Sherman Act, the first federal "antitrust law," was enacted in 1890, at a time when there was enormous concern about "trusts" -- combinations of companies that were able to control entire industries. Since then, other laws have been enacted to supplement the Sherman Act, including the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act (1914). With some revisions, these laws still are in effect today. They have the same basic objective: making sure there are strong economic incentives for businesses to operate efficiently, keep prices down, and keep quality up.

Discuss the extent to which Consumer law achieves its objectives. The most efficient way for consumers to get what they want is through the ‘market’, not the government, but businesses have more power than their customers. Some businesses can and will use abuse this power and cheat and steal from consumers to make money. Because of this, the government regulates the behaviour of businesses to have a market economy that functions properly. These laws mainly protect consumers against; misleading/deceptive representations, unconscionable conduct, unfair contracts, and unsafe goods and/or services. To protect consumers, different legal and non-legal approaches have been taken.

This essay will review the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (as amended) (‘CPUTs’) to assess how they are responsible for the operation of the Internal Market and consider whether the CPUTs have accomplished its objective of consumer protection. This essay will first explain the Internal Market and the significance of regulation and then proceed to demonstrate how the CPUTs enable the Internal Market to function properly and its protection of consumers.

Unknowingly, Antitrust began a cycle of Rule of Reason, which is the Lax Enforcement, and the Per Se Rule, which is the tight enforcement (Boyes 2013, p 249). Litigation of the Antirust law was not frequent, and that’s because between the years of passage 1890 and 1914, only seven cases were tried by the Supreme Court, in which they broke up monopolized companies like Northern Securities, and Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey; but also allowed the formation of major league baseball. This period of Lax Enforcement ended with the passage of the Clayton Antitrust Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act, and ushered in Per Se Rule. The changes to Antitrust laws gave a more clear definition to the law by guide lining the prohibitions of price discrimination, the creations of barriers to enter a market, outlaws mergers deemed unfair, and imbalanced methods of business; the Federal Trade Commission was also allowed to investigate into these practices. Since 1941, the FTC and it parent division, the Justice Department, had filed over 2,800 cases related to Antitrust, but it is the private sector that had an exponential amount lawsuits filed. Between the passage of these two laws and the Supreme Court Justice William Douglas, who prized the laws, any inkling of proof that a business could be monopolizing or engaging in unfair business practices, almost always lead to a guilty verdict that mostly results in a heavy fine, and in extreme

Goals of Antitrust Law Antitrust laws are meant to protect competition in markets. They try to ensure that all individuals have an “equally opportunity in honest competition.” Early in the nation’s history, there was widespread fear of the dangers of monopolies and other restrictions on competition. In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act to prevent limits on competition caused by private parties. Thus the main goal of antitrust law is to preserve “economic freedom” and a “free-enterprise system.” Specifically, it attempts to preserve “the freedom to compete” for businesses. In a practical sense, antitrust laws are seeking to prevent burdens on competition in the marketplace.

Finally, you may be asking “Are oligopolies harmful or beneficial to the consumer?” There are some economists who view oligopolies as negative, stating that they artificially inflate prices and inhibit healthy competition between companies. They claim oligopolies are one step away from monopolies, and that without restriction placed upon their activities, oligopolists will tend toward monopolistic price fixation. However, these statements are normative, and completely unfounded. The fact is that firms do not strive to be monopolies. They prefer some healthy competition. It keeps them current and innovative, and provides the framework for cutting costs, finding more efficient production methods and developing new products. Most importantly, it keeps them out from under government scrutiny, as a monopoly would be. Consumers benefit from this in the form of lower prices and more variety. In fact, as you look at our current economy, you can see these points supported everywhere. First, the competition

One law, which helps protect businesses and promotes fair competition for the benefit of the consumers, is the US Anti-Trust law. This law is comprised of three different acts: The Sherman Act 1890, the Clayton Act 1914 and the Federal Trade Commission Act 1914. The first role these acts perform is to restrict the formation of cartels which would perform outside of the guidelines of the government and there for not be bound by there laws. The second role these acts perform is to ensure no single business entity can perform a certain level of mergers and acquisitions, which would essentially turn them into a monopoly and reduce competition. Overall, the antitrust laws are constantly debated for their overall functionality and efficiency in protecting the fair business practices of the United States. [2] “One view, mostly closely associated with the "Chicago School of economics" suggests that antitrust laws should focus solely on the benefits to consumers and overall efficiency, while a broad range of

Introduction Since the late nineteenth century, the federal government has challenged business practices and mergers that create or may create a monopoly in a particular market. Federal legislation has varied in effectiveness in terms of preventing anti-competitive mergers.

Recommendations Competition being one of the major issues that often must be addressed in the business world, it is important for a firm to learn on ways to reduce the impact of the competition. Competition is definitely an important factor in helping a business

Threats of Substitutes: Businesses are not only faced with competition within the industry they operate in. They also face competition from businesses in other industries.

Existing Competitors. Rivalry among competitors within an industry use price discounting, new products, marketing, and other techniques to be competitive. Profitability of an industry suffers from high rivalry. The intensity with which companies compete and the basis on which they compete determine to which degree rivalry brings down an industry’s profitability (Porter, 2008). Pure competition is considered by economists as a competition with a high

This paper studies the idea of competition. What is competition? Do we need competition, why do we need it? The paper further elaborates competition in aspects of two school of thoughts, the Classical and Marxist economics.