A Corporation... shall not engage in the practice of re sale price maintenance. 1
Joey was the only retailer who was not in breach of S48 of the TPA. He would have evidence to support his claim, as he did not collude with the other retailers. Joey did not agree to any such conduct as price maintenance, as his increase is based on a true profit and cost benefit, made on a genuine commercial decision prompted by his financial adviser. There is no evidence to suggest he was involved in the price fixing.
(d) Two other retailers have approached Avoidarays. The company agrees to sell the retailers the Noglowgear under the condition that they sell the range for no less than $60 per item and that they stock the range exclusively and not hold the Noburn products.
This is another example of misuse of market power s46 TPA. An exclusivity distribution agreement may be legal but if the terms of the contract are to eliminate or damage a competitor in that particular market then the contract is not of legality. This is the condition Avoidarays had with the two retailers who approached them. A condition that they stock the Noglowgear was that they were not to stock the competitor Noburns items. Further more that they were to sell the range at no less than $60 per item. This is not allowed as s48 of the TPA prohibits corporations from engaging in the practice of resale price maintenance. A supplier can recommend a resale price only if it is clear it is a recommendation, and providing the supplier does not influence the seller to sell below or higher than that price.
E-pasta adrese, uz kuru nosūtīt darba saiti:
Saite uz darbu: