New Zealand: Proposed Changes To Part 5 Of The Commerce Act - Reviewing The Review

Last Updated: 22 July 2007
Article by Mark Williamson and Oliver Turton

In this update, Mark Williamson and Oliver Turton cast a critical eye over some of the proposals contained in the recently released discussion paper relating to Part 5 of the Commerce Act 1986. Part 5 contains provisions dealing with Commerce Commission clearances and authorisations.


A party seeking to buy assets or shares of a competitor can seek a clearance if it has competition concerns. The Commission will grant a clearance if it is satisfied that the acquisition will not, or will not be likely to, substantially lessen competition in a market. More rarely, an authorisation is sought for an acquisition or conduct where a party believes there is probably going to be a substantial lessening of competition but that the public benefits arising from the acquisition or conduct outweigh the detriment from the loss of competition.

For the sake of brevity, we consider only those proposals in the discussion document relating to the merger clearance regime. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of DLA Phillips Fox or any of its clients.

Clearance time frames

The issue

The Commission has 10 working days to deliver its clearance decision or such longer period as the parties 'agree'. However, a request by the Commission to extend the period is literally an offer you cannot refuse, as the Commission will decline your clearance on the basis it cannot be 'satisfied' without more time to investigate. Only one of the last 52 clearance applications has been decided within the 10 working day period (our last clearance application took six months).

The proposal

The Ministry of Economic Development (MED) tentatively suggest that 30 working days should be adopted as the default time frame.

What's right with it

More often than not parties only seek clearance for complex mergers that are close to the line. Irrespective of anything, it simply takes time for the Commission to reach the 'correct' decision for these mergers.1 While lawyers gain a feel for the Commission's time frames, increasing the statutory time period provides clarity to the business community both in New Zealand and overseas. Also, parties don't have to deal with repeated requests for extensions from the moment they file an application.

What's wrong with it

A loss of the tension between applicant and the Commission, because the Commission is currently required to approach an applicant seeking an extension and publicly announce that such an extension has been agreed. Thirty working days (six weeks) becomes the norm with no pressure or incentive on the Commission to reach a decision faster. Human nature being what it is, the 48% of decisions that are currently made in less than 30 working days would, more than likely, move to 30 working days (although, to be fair, many are close to this already). There might be less incentive for the Government to better resource the Commission to make faster decisions.

The verdict

A change probably needs to be made to reflect reality, however, it will probably not do anything to shorten timeframes and might actually increase them. The underlying solution is greater resourcing for the Commission. Compromise? ...20 working days. Possibly little practical benefit as all competition practitioners know that the Commission generally takes five to six weeks.

Publication of written clearance decisions

The issue

Perhaps surprisingly, the Commission is not required to publish written clearance decisions. The Commission always does so but in recent years (as clearance applications have become more complex) the length of time between notice of decision and the release of written decision has increased (at last count, 35 working days – longer than the actual determination itself). This is not an issue if the clearance is granted, but if a clearance is declined, the applicant has 20 working days to appeal (unless extended by the Court).The 20 working days start from when the decision is made by the Commission, not when the written decision is released.

The proposal

Retain the status quo.

What's right with it

If your clearance application is declined, first your adviser should have told you prior to filing that there was a possible chance of a decline and the likely reasons why, and second, towards the end of the clearance process, the Commission generally tells you the issues it has with your merger. Accordingly, receiving written reasons should not normally delay filing an initial notice of appeal (although it is obviously essential for the preparation of the substance of the appeal).

Also, if you wish to wait for the written decision before filing, we can't see why a Court would ever fail to grant an appropriate extension of the 20 day period (particularly if the Commission did not object).

What's wrong with it

It seems to us a fundamental requirement of administrative law to give reasons for any form of substantive administrative decision. The Commission is required by the Commerce Act to give reasons when it makes a decision on an authorisation application, why not a clearance? As with the 10 day time period, we suspect that the lack of a requirement to give written reasons for a clearance dates back to the days when clearance decisions were intended to be, in a sense, 'quick and dirty'.

The verdict

On balance, let's get some certainty in the process by requiring the Commission to give public written reasons within perhaps 15 working days of its decision, and have the appeal period run from the date the applicant receives the Commission's reasons. Anything else has too many variables for parties trying to put together what are often very significant transactions.

The enforcement and variation of undertakings to divest shares or assets

The issue

The Commission may accept undertakings to divest shares or assets as a condition of approving a merger. However, there is no direct means for the Commission to enforce undertakings to divest shares or assets. The only option if a firm breaches an undertaking is to take a case to the High Court claiming that the merger substantially lessened competition.

In addition, there are no means for the Commission to amend an undertaking once a clearance or authorisation decision has been made.

The proposal

The MED concludes that a change is needed to allow the Commission to seek orders from the Court requiring compliance with undertakings along with the power to correct, punish and compensate. Regarding amendments, the MED recommends that the original applicant should be able to ask the Commission to approve minor variations.

What's right with it

Dealing with divestments is a thorny issue for regulators the world over (one need only look across the Tasman at the issues the ACCC faced in the Toll/Patrick acquisition). The proposal may be a way of bringing more openness and transparency to the process.

It also aligns us with Australia where section 89B undertakings under the Trade Practices Act are enforceable by the ACCC.

We agree it makes sense for minor variations to divestment undertakings to be permitted.

What's wrong with it

Careful thought needs to be given because the clearance process is voluntary and it does not follow that, because a merger is cleared with a divestment2 (that is, at least in theory, volunteered by the applicant), the merger is unlawful without the divestment. To maintain the integrity of the clearance process and its relationship with section 47 of the Commerce Act,3 a party who seeks a clearance but then does not comply with its terms should be in the same position as a party who proceeds without a clearance. That is, subject to the risk that the Commission will conclude that an acquisition substantially lessens competition and take appropriate court action (which may result in forced divestment). A party should not be forced to divest an asset without a thorough enquiry as to whether the divestment is required to protect competition.

The verdict

This is a difficult area, however, on balance we would favour retaining the status quo, as provided the Commission negotiates robust divestment agreements and takes appropriate enforcement action arising from the merger when required, the current system appears adequate.

Behavioural undertakings

The issue

When considering a clearance application, the Commission can accept undertakings to dispose of assets or shares as a condition of granting a clearance. However, the Commission is expressly prohibited from considering behavioural undertakings relating to the post acquisition conduct of the merged entity (for example, agreeing to keep prices below an agreed level or providing access to an essential facility).

The proposal

Retain the status quo.

What's right with it

Almost everyone agrees that behavioural undertakings are problematic. Put simply, they turn the Commission from a forward-looking adjudicator of competition effects into a regulator over some prescribed period (the 'correct' duration of which is highly problematic). They are also inflexible and unresponsive to market changes.

What's wrong with it

In limited circumstances, the ACCC has indicated a willingness to use behavioural undertakings to supplement structural undertakings (Toll/Patrick is a good example of this). In a perfect world, we would have the resources and confidence in the Commission to allow it to judge when it was appropriate to accept behavioural undertakings.

The verdict

The world is not perfect. Given our size and resources, the MED's recommendation to retain the prohibition on behavioural undertakings is probably a good one. Applications for clearance might take even longer if the Commission had to consider and negotiate behavioural undertakings.

Informal pre-merger process

The issue

Although the Commission welcomes informal notification of proposed mergers (and may give an indication as to whether clearance is required) it does not give letters of comfort. This is in contrast to the ACCC which operates a more structured informal pre-merger system. It has been suggested to the MED that a letter of comfort process akin to the Australian system would provide a useful supplement to the formal clearance system.

The proposal

Retain the status quo.

What's right with it

We have traditionally been strong advocates for our formal merger process which our experience suggests is admired overseas. A good adviser can tell you whether a clearance is required (and, if needed, this can be confirmed by an informal and confidential meeting with the Commission). If the merger is sufficiently close to the line that an adviser is unsure as to the competition effects, it probably needs a proper look by the Commission, with accompanying market enquiries, for a client to be comfortable it will not breach section 47 by proceeding without clearance.

What's wrong with it

Confidentiality and reducing uncertainty are generally critical in the context of a merger. A process which allows business to get an increased level of comfort (albeit limited) while retaining confidentiality should be looked at carefully.

The verdict

We find the prospect of a confidential tick by the Commission very appealing but on balance let's focus on improving the formal system and better publicise the willingness of the Commission to entertain informal approaches.

Closing date for submissions

Submissions to the MED close on 10 August 2007, so there is still time if you wish to make a submission.


1. And a much longer time for an applicant to appeal an incorrect decision made in haste.

2. For example the Pernod/Ricard merger was cleared with a divestment. The merger proceeded but the divestment did not take place. The Commission investigated and found that the merger, even without the divestment, did not and was not likely to result in a substantial lessening of competition.

3. Which, in short, prohibits mergers which substantially lessen competition.

Phillips Fox has changed its name to DLA Phillips Fox because the firm entered into an exclusive alliance with DLA Piper, one of the largest legal services organisations in the world. We will retain our offices in every major commercial centre in Australia and New Zealand, with no operational change to your relationship with the firm. DLA Phillips Fox can now take your business one step further − by connecting you to a global network of legal experience, talent and knowledge.

This publication is intended as a first point of reference and should not be relied on as a substitute for professional advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to any particular circumstances and no liability will be accepted for any losses incurred by those relying solely on this publication.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.