Corporate law Brisbane

What is an exclusive supply contract?

HomeBlogCommercial lawWhat is an exclusive supply contract?

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

An exclusive supply contract (Exclusive Supply Contract), also known as Exclusive Dealing, occurs when one party trading with another imposes some form of restriction on the other’s freedom to choose with whom, in what, or where they deal.  Some examples of Exclusive Dealing may include:

  • the supplier being restricted to supplying the goods in a specific geographical area, or through a particular channel; or
  • restricting a purchaser from buying the same or similar goods from other suppliers.

This article outlines what an Exclusive Supply Contract or Exclusive Dealing is and when it may not be legal.

What is a supply contract?

A supply contract is a contract for the sale of goods from one party (Supplier) to another party (Purchaser).  Some everyday examples include a supplier providing:

  • vegetables to a grocery;
  • coffee beans to a café; or
  • books to a bookstore.

What exclusivity clauses may Purchasers request?

Purchasers may request several exclusivity clauses within a supply contract, the most common of which are an exclusive:

  • area clause; or
  • product clause.

An exclusive area clause restricts the Supplier to supplying the specific goods in question to the Purchaser exclusively in a given geographical area.  This type of clause is useful in situations where the Purchaser does not want local competitors to have access to the same goods.

An exclusive product clause is similar in nature to the exclusive area clause, but instead requires that the Supplier sell the product only to you.  This can often apply to online businesses who do not have a definitive geographical location.

What exclusivity clauses Suppliers may request

Some common examples of exclusivity clauses which Suppliers may request include various terms, including an exclusive:

  • dealing clause;
  • channel clause;
  • product clause;
  • pricing clauses; and/or
  • offers clauses.

An exclusive channel clause involves the Supplier restricting the purchases from selling through certain channels.  For example, the Supplier may not allow you to sell the goods online.  This can be useful in situations where the Supplier already sells their product online and does not wish to have competition in that market.

An exclusive product clause in this circumstance would involve the Supplier restricting the Purchaser from buying the same or similar goods from other Suppliers.  These clauses are useful where Suppliers do not wish to allow Purchasers to buy from their competitors in the future.

When is Exclusive Dealing illegal?

A blanket prohibition against Exclusive Dealing is provided for in section 47 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (Act).  That section prohibits corporations, in trade or commerce, from restricting, limiting or circumscribing[1] any dealings with goods and services.[2]  Further, Exclusive Dealing will only generally break the law where the conduct results in substantially lessening the competition in the relevant market.[3]

To assess whether an Exclusive Supply Contract would substantially lessen the competition, it must be considered whether:

  • there has been a real effect on the competition in the overall market for a particular product and its substitutes;
  • the refusal to supply would substantially restrict the availability of that type of product to consumers; or
  • consumers’ ability to buy a product and its substitutes are severely restricted because the business has imposed restrictions on the area as a condition of supply.

As a rule of thumb, the more exclusive the product and the more powerful the Supplier, the more likely it is that the level of competition will be substantially affected and that some pecuniary penalty will be imposed.[4]  The Court has power pursuant to section 76(1) of the Act to make orders imposing pecuniary penalties upon corporations illegally engaging in Exclusive Dealing.  Before making such orders, the Court will consider the following factors:[5]

  • the size and financial position of the contravening company;
  • whether the contravention was intentional;
  • the period over which the contravention extended;
  • whether the contravening conduct was systematic, deliberate or covert;
  • whether senior management were aware of or involved in the contravention;
  • whether the contravening company had a corporate culture conducive to compliance with the Act;
  • whether the company co-operated with the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission;
  • whether the contravener has engaged in similar conduct in the past; and
  • the effect on the functioning of the market and other economic effects of the conduct.

Takeaways

It is essential that both Suppliers and Purchasers alike carefully consider whether any exclusivity arrangements exist, and whether these arrangements have the potential to lessen competition substantially in the relevant market.

Links and further references

Related articles

Changes to monetary threshold for consumer contracts

Deal fatigue in commercial contracts

Tortious interference with contract – what must be proven?

Legislation

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)

Cases

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1169

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 1170

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1472

 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Visa Inc [2015] FCA 1020

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Fila Sport Oceania Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 376

 Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd [1990] FCA 762

Further information about Exclusive Supply Contracts

If you need advice on Exclusive Supply Contracts, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024

[1] Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 47(13).

[2] Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 47(2) – (9).

[3] Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 47(10).

[4] Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1169, [81] referring to Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd [1990] FCA 762, [42]; Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 1170, [16]; Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Oakmoore Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1472, [74].

[5] Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 76; Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd [1990] FCA 762; Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Visa Inc [2015] FCA 1020, [80]-[82].


Related insights about Exclusive Supply Contracts

  • Labor plan to abolish non-compete clauses from 2027

    Labor plan to abolish non-compete clauses from 2027

    On 25 March 2025, the Albanese Labor government announced in its 2025-26 Budget (Budget), that it intended to abolish non-compete clauses in employment contracts for approximately three (3) million workers from 2027.

    Read more …

  • Damages for competitor misleading conduct under the ACL

    Damages for competitor misleading conduct under the ACL

    Section 236 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) entitles any person, including corporations – to claim compensation for loss or damage suffered from misleading or deceptive conduct.  The High Court has developed numerous general principles for assessing loss or damage which we will discuss in this article.

    Read more …

  • Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

    Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

    The current Franchising Code of Conduct (Old Code) is scheduled to “sunset” (meaning it will automatically expire unless extended or replaced) on 1 April 2025, with the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes–Franchising) Regulations 2024 (Cth) (New Regulations) coming into effect on the same date.

    Read more …

  • New Anti-Money Laundering Bill

    New Anti-Money Laundering Bill

    On 11 September 2024 the (Bill) was introduced to the House of Representatives.[1]  The Bill will amend the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) (AML/CTF Act) to include provisions regarding deterrence, detection and disruption of money laundering and terrorism financing.[2]  Most changes will take effect from 31 March 2026.

    Read more …

  • Overview of the illegal phoenixing regime

    Overview of the illegal phoenixing regime

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2020 (Cth) (Amending Act) came into force on 18 February 2020 and was designed to prevent illegal phoenixing activity.  The Amending Act introduced reforms such as creditor-defeating disposition provisions to combat phoenixing activity.  Additional provisions amending the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) were aimed to encourage accountability by…

    Read more …

  • Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses

    Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses

    9 November 2023 was a crucial date for Australian businesses because from that date significant penalties can now be imposed on businesses found to have unfair contract terms (UCT) in their contracts.  The Federal Government had introduced significant changes to laws relating to UCT on 10 November 2022.

    Read more …

  • Australian legislation addresses loot boxes in video games

    Australian legislation addresses loot boxes in video games

    The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Loot Boxes) Bill 2022 (Bill)  has been tabled in the House of Representatives on the 28 November 2022.  The private member’s Bill acts in response to growing support for the regulation of features and elements within video games which appear to simulate gambling.

    Read more …

  • Consumer law changes – what business owners need to know

    Consumer law changes – what business owners need to know

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Act 2022 (Cth) (Act) amends various pieces of legislation to provide stronger competition and consumer protections.  In particular, the Act bolsters the penalties applicable for offences relating to unfair practices and unfair contract terms under as contained within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) and…

    Read more …

  • Is a proposed settlement fair and reasonable – Federal Court

    Is a proposed settlement fair and reasonable – Federal Court

    Class action lawsuits commonly resolve in a settlement between the members of a class and the respondents to a claim.  However, there are strict requirements to proposed settlements, including that they are ‘fair and reasonable’, which will be subject to judicial oversight.

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend