The ACCC alleged Jurlique had engaged in resale price maintenance. In particular, the ACCC alleged the first and second respondents had contravened ss 45 and 48 of the Act and the third and fourth respondents had been knowingly concerned in those contraventions. It was further alleged that the fifth respondent had ancillary involvement in those contraventions (ss 75B and 76 of the Act)

All respondents made admissions in relation to the conduct allegedand a joint submission as to final orders and penalties was submitted.

ACCC, 'Highest ever penalty for resale price maintenance against skincare, cosmetics company Jurlique: $3.4 million' (ACCC press release, 8 February 2007)

Bork, Robert H, ‘The Rule of Reason and the Per Se Concept: Price Fixing and Market Division’ (1966) 75 The Yale Law Journal 373

Brebner, Julie, ‘Resale Price Maintenance – The Need for Further Reform’ (2001) 9 Trade Practices Law Journal 19

Cooper, James et al, ‘Vertical Antitrust Policy as a Problem of Inference’ (2005) 23 International Journal of Industrial Organization 639

Edwards, Geoff, ‘When Should Resale Price Maintenance be Authorised? Guidelines for Use in Authorisation Decisions’ (1996) 4 Trade Practices Law Journal 161

Hahn, Robert W (ed) (2006) Antitrust Policy and Vertical Restraints, AEL-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies

Hylton, Keith M (2003) Antitrust Law: Economic Theory And Common Law Evolution, Cambridge University Press

Landrigan, Mitchell G, ‘Vertical Price and Non-Price Restraints in Australia and the US: A Comparative Analysis’ (1997) 25 Australian Business Law Review 312

Meese, Alan J, ‘Property Rights and Intrabrand Restraints’ (2003 – 2004) 89 Cornell Law Review 553

Telser, Lester G, ‘Why Should Manufacturers Want Fair Trade’ (1960) 3 Journal of Law and Economics 86

Wang, Yuankuo and Davison, Mark J, ‘Resale Price Maintenance: is the Per Se Prohibition Justified?’ (1992) 14 Adelaide Law Review 35

Click here for full case from AustLII

Click here for full case from Jade