IGS v JLL and Anor M79/1998

IGS Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute concerned the interpretation of section 45D of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) (the Act), which prohibits secondary boycotts. The applicant alleged that the respondents, JLL and another entity, had engaged in conduct that contravened section 45D by attempting to induce a third party to cease supplying goods to the applicant. The Full Federal Court had found that the conduct did not amount to a contravention of section 45D.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Full Federal Court had erred in its interpretation of section 45D of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth). Specifically, the court was required to determine whether the conduct of the respondents, in seeking to persuade a third party to cease supplying goods to the applicant, constituted a "boycott" within the meaning of section 45D, and whether the necessary intention or purpose for a contravention of that section was established.

Gummow and Hayne JJ, in dismissing the application for leave to appeal, held that the Full Federal Court had correctly interpreted section 45D. Their Honours reasoned that the section requires a "concerted" or "collective" action to withhold custom or services from a third party, with the purpose of preventing or hindering that third party from supplying goods or services to another person. In this instance, the court found that the conduct of the respondents, while potentially involving persuasion, did not amount to the type of concerted action contemplated by section 45D. The court emphasised that the purpose of the conduct must be directed towards preventing or hindering supply, and that the evidence did not establish this purpose in the manner required by the legislation.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.