Health World Limited

Health World Limited (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the respondent, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), to refuse to grant an authorisation for Health World's proposed conduct. The applicant sought to implement a new pricing and supply policy for its range of health food products, which would involve restricting the supply of its products to retailers who agreed to adhere to a minimum resale price. The ACCC had refused authorisation on the basis that the proposed conduct was likely to substantially lessen competition in contravention of section 47 of the *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* (Cth). The matter came before Nicole Worth J in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the ACCC's decision to refuse authorisation was affected by an error of law. Specifically, the Court was required to consider whether the ACCC had erred in its assessment of the likely competitive effects of Health World's proposed pricing and supply policy, and whether it had properly applied the relevant provisions of the *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* (Cth) in reaching its conclusion. This involved examining the ACCC's findings regarding market definition, the nature of the alleged anti-competitive conduct, and the potential impact on consumers.

Her Honour found that the ACCC had made a jurisdictional error in its assessment of the application for authorisation. The ACCC had failed to properly consider the potential pro-competitive benefits of the proposed conduct, such as the potential for increased investment in product promotion and customer service by retailers, which could ultimately benefit consumers. The Court held that the ACCC's reasoning was unduly narrow and did not adequately engage with the statutory test for authorisation, which requires a balancing of anti-competitive detriments against potential public benefits. The principles of administrative law concerning the proper exercise of statutory discretion and the need for a comprehensive and balanced assessment of competing factors were central to the Court's reasoning.

The Court ordered that the ACCC's decision to refuse authorisation be set aside and remitted to the ACCC for reconsideration according to law.