Restrictive Trade Practices Act 19681
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1969.tb02304.x |
| Date | 01 May 1969 |
| Published date | 01 May 1969 |
STATUTES
RESTRICTIVE
TRADE
PRACTICES
ACT
1968
UNDER
the Restrictive Trade Practices Act
1956
a system of
registration was set up for those types of arrangement that are most
likely to restrict competition. Most of those registered have now
been referred to the Restrictive Practices Court and have been
declared to be contrary to the public interest
on
the limited
criteria described in the
‘(
gateways
”
to section
21.
The cost
and trouble of defending a reference are
so
great that almost all
were abandoned undefended, even
if
the parties believed that they
increased productivity. During the debate
on
the second reading
of the Bill,a the President of the Board of Trade said:
u
The Government do not believe that the unaided working
of market forces will always be sufficient to bring about the
needed rationalisation of industry.
.
.
.
So
the Government have
increasingly found
it
to
be
necessary to take a view about the
structure of important sectors of industry, and
to
try to bring
about desirable changes both directly through the sponsoring
Departments for industry, and indirectly. through the work of
the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation and the
Economic
Development Committees, the
These changes, which are all designed to encourage long-run
productivity and innovation, may involve co-operative action
between firms
in
an industry;
or
they may involve a deliberate
process of merger and rationalisation.”
Consequently, in section
1
the Board of Trade has taken power
to exempt from registration, and so from a reference to the
Restrictive Practices Court, any agreement which appears
to
it
to fulfil certain conditions. These are that
it
is
“
calculated to
promote the carrying out of an industrial
or
commercial project
or
scheme of substantial importance to the national economy,”
that its object is to promote efficiency,
or
create
or
improve
capacity, that the restrictions are
no
wider than are reasonably
necessary to achieve that object and that
‘(
the agreement is
on
balance expedient
in
the national interest.” The detailed wording
of the conditions was discussed during the Committee stage in the
Commons,J but
it
is thought that the Board is more likely to
concentrate
on
encouraging industrial and distributional efficiency
than
on
the imperfections in the wording of the statute.
It
is more
likely to persuade the parties to make their agreements more
1
Analysed in
greater
detail in
[1968]
J.B.L.
260,
and in my
book;
Monopolies
2
H.C.Deb.,
Vol.
763,
col.
1006.
3
Zbid.
Standing Committee
H,
cole.
71-116.
little Neddies
’.
and
RestTictiue Practices,
1968
pp.
‘230-241.
802
To continue reading
Request your trial