Competition Policy Reform Act 1995

The Competition Policy Reform Act 1995 is a Commonwealth Act that amended the Trade Practices Act 1974 and the Prices Surveillance Act 1983. The Act inserted an object into the principal legislation stating that the object is to enhance the welfare of Australians through the promotion of competition and fair trading and provision for consumer protection.

For businesses, this Act is best understood as a major reform statute rather than a stand-alone operating manual. It changed the national competition framework in a broad way. The legislation shows reforms to competition rules, authorisation and notification processes, the Competition Code, the National Competition Council, and a new access-to-services regime. It also extended several rules to services, not just goods, which is especially relevant for modern service-based businesses.

The legislation shows that the Act made broad structural and substantive amendments. It inserted an object clause into the principal Act, amended interpretation provisions, changed the extended application of Parts IV, IVA and V, amended rules about contracts, arrangements and understandings affecting competition, repealed the former price discrimination provision, changed exceptions, and altered authorisation and notification pathways.

It also introduced Part XIA dealing with the Competition Code and Part IIIA dealing with access to services. The legislation further shows reforms concerning the Commission, the Tribunal and the National Competition Council, as well as provisions dealing with the application of the law to the Commonwealth, States and Territories and some local government activities. For a business owner, the key point is that this was a system-wide reform, not a narrow technical amendment.

The businesses most likely to feel the practical effect are those that set conditions on supply or acquisition, coordinate with competitors or channel partners, control resale behaviour, or operate important service infrastructure. The legislation also shows that the law was extended to the Commonwealth and Commonwealth authorities, and later to States and Territories, with provisions about activities that are not business and exemption of certain activities of local government bodies from Part IV.

That means public sector and government-linked operators cannot safely assume they sit outside the competition framework. Whether an entity is carrying on business activities remains an important practical question. Private businesses dealing with government-owned enterprises, statutory operators or local government bodies should also be careful about assuming those counterparties are exempt.

For many SMEs, the practical trigger points are contractual and commercial rather than constitutional. The legislation points to risk areas including contracts, arrangements or understandings that restrict dealings or affect competition, price-related arrangements, covenants, exclusive dealing, resale price maintenance, and assumptions that another law authorises the conduct.

Examples of conduct that should prompt a legal check include telling a reseller what price to charge, requiring a customer to buy related services from a nominated provider, refusing supply unless a buyer avoids a competitor, entering arrangements with competitors about prices or market behaviour, or relying on a State or Territory law as a supposed defence. If any of those features appear in your documents or sales practices, the arrangement should be reviewed carefully.

A major practical theme in the legislation is the extension of several competition provisions from goods to services. The amendments shown include references to services in price-related provisions, covenants, exclusive dealing and resale price maintenance. The legislation also expands the concept of re-supply of services. It says re-supply includes supply of the original services in an altered form or condition, and supply of other services that are substantially similar to the original services and could not have been supplied without acquiring the original services.

This matters because many Australian businesses trade mainly in services rather than physical products. Software subscriptions, digital marketing, logistics, maintenance, consulting, education, managed IT and platform-enabled services can all involve service bundles, channel restrictions, white-labelling, subcontracting or re-supply models. A business that assumes competition rules are mainly about products may miss important risk areas.

The legislation shows important changes to exclusive dealing and to the mechanisms for obtaining protection for certain conduct. Section 47 was amended to extend aspects of exclusive dealing to services. The text also inserted a rule that subsection 47(1) does not apply to a corporation engaging in certain conduct if the corporation has given the Commission a notice under subsection 93(1) describing the conduct and the notice is in force under section 93.

The notification provisions were also expanded. The legislation sets out when some notices come into force, when they do not come into force, and when they cease to be in force. It also provides for the Commission to give written notice if it is satisfied that the likely benefit to the public from the conduct or proposed conduct will not outweigh the likely detriment to the public from the conduct or proposed conduct, and requires written reasons.

The legislation further shows that the Commission may grant an authorisation to engage in conduct that constitutes or may constitute the practice of resale price maintenance. While the authorisation remains in force, section 48 does not prevent the conduct in accordance with the authorisation. For business owners, the practical lesson is that some conduct is not simply lawful or unlawful on its face. In some cases, the legal position depends on whether a valid notification or authorisation exists, whether it covers the conduct, and whether it remains in force.

The Act rewrote the exceptions provision in a more structured way. In deciding whether a person has contravened the relevant Part, certain things specified in, and specifically authorised by, Commonwealth, State, Territory or other laws may be disregarded. The legislation also says that conduct can be taken to be specified in, and authorised by, a law if a licence or other instrument issued under the law specifies the person authorised to engage in the conduct or the place where the conduct is to occur, and the law specifies the attributes of the conduct except those matters.

But the legislation imposes important limits. It says that, for something to be regarded as specifically authorised, the authorising provision must expressly refer to the federal Act. It also says some regulations do not have the effect of requiring conduct to be disregarded if the conduct happens more than 2 years after those regulations came into operation, and it limits the effect of substantially similar regulations. The legislation further limits the operation of some State and Territory authorisations depending on whether the jurisdiction is a party to the Competition Principles Agreement and the Conduct Code Agreement. It also says some of these exceptions do not apply in deciding whether a person has contravened section 50 or 50A.

For businesses, this means a licence, permit, regulation or industry-specific law should not be treated as a blanket defence. The wording of the authorising law matters. The timing matters. The jurisdictional setting may matter. If your business model depends on statutory permissions, regulated monopolies, local government arrangements or sector-specific approvals, the interaction should be checked carefully.

The legislation introduced Part IIIA, titled access to services. It includes provisions for recommendations by the National Competition Council, declaration by a designated Minister, duration and revocation of declarations, review rights, notification of access disputes, arbitration by the Commission, confidentiality requests, review by the Tribunal, appeals to the Federal Court, registration of contracts, prohibition on hindering access to declared services, access undertakings for non-declared services, and enforcement mechanisms including injunctions.

This regime is most relevant where one business controls a service that others may need access to in order to compete. Not every SME will be directly involved, but businesses in transport, ports, energy-adjacent services, utilities, communications, logistics corridors or other bottleneck services should recognise the significance. Even a smaller operator may encounter the regime when negotiating access contracts, dealing with a larger network owner, or assessing whether conduct could be characterised as hindering access to a declared service.

For most startups and SMEs, the safest way to read this Act is through the documents and practices it affects. Review your distribution agreements, reseller terms, franchise or licence arrangements, procurement terms, platform rules, pricing policies, channel partner manuals and any side letters with competitors or major suppliers. The legislation shows that competition risk can arise from conditions attached to supply or acquisition, from price-related arrangements, from resale controls, and from assumptions that a notification, authorisation or statutory permission covers the conduct.

Also review your internal approval process. Staff in sales, partnerships and procurement often create competition risk before legal sees the documents. A practical compliance step is to build a short approval checklist for any arrangement involving exclusivity, bundling, nominated suppliers, resale restrictions, competitor contact or infrastructure access. That is especially important for service businesses, because the legislation makes clear that services were brought more squarely into the framework.

The Act received Royal Assent on 20 July 1995. The commencement provision then split the reforms across multiple commencement times. Parts 1, 2 and 7, and Division 2 of Part 5, commenced on the 28th day after Royal Assent. Part 3 commenced on a day fixed by Proclamation, or if not proclaimed within 6 months after Royal Assent, on the first day after the end of that 6 month period. Part 4 commenced immediately after Part 3. Division 1 of Part 5 commenced on the first day after the end of 12 months after Royal Assent. Part 6 commenced immediately after Division 1 of Part 5.

Because this is an amending Act and some commencement dates depend on proclamation or calculated periods, businesses should verify exact dates against the latest official compilation before relying on them for a historical or technical point.

This page is based on the Federal Register of Legislation text for the Competition Policy Reform Act 1995. The Act is recorded as in force in the official metadata. The available text clearly supports the main reforms described above, including the object clause, service-related amendments, changes to exceptions, notification and authorisation pathways, the Competition Code, the National Competition Council and the access-to-services regime.

Because this is an amending statute and the available text is truncated near the end, this page should be used as a practical overview only. For any current compliance question, check the latest consolidated legislation and any current regulator guidance before acting.