New Zealand: Resale Price Maintenance: Per Se Illegal, Or Best Considered Under A "Rule Of Reason"?

Last Updated: 15 October 2007
Article by Andrew Peterson


In the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc v PSKS, Inc.,1 a majority of the Court overruled its decision in Dr Miles,2 a case decided in 1911 which, for almost a century, had established that agreements giving effect to minimum resale price maintenance were per se illegal. Resale price maintenance, or "RPM" as it is usually described, generally arises when a supplier either agrees with a reseller, or induces a reseller, not to resell goods at less than specified minimum prices.

The case is important as it marks a move away from regarding RPM as prohibited regardless of its effect on competition, and now requires vertical price restraints to be judged by a "rule of reason" test involving an assessment of the actual effect of the conduct.

The Leegin case is relevant to New Zealand as section 37(1) of the Commerce Act 1986 provides that RPM is illegal per se - similar to the position which existed in the United States under Dr Miles. While Leegin's direct application may therefore be fettered by the statutory prohibition in the Commerce Act, the decision is nevertheless welcome for two main reasons: first, because it represents a positive development in the understanding of the economic effect and underlying rationale for RPM at a highly influential judicial level, and secondly, because as part of the current review of Part V of the Commerce Act, the Ministry of Economic Development has invited comment on whether the Act should be amended to allow for a clearance process for restrictive trade practices, which would also apply to per se offences such as RPM, effectively allowing RPM to be "cleared" if it did not substantially lessen competition (similar to the approach under a "rule of reason" analysis).

Vertical price maintenance in Leegin

The facts of Leegin are these: Leegin designed, manufactured and sold leather goods to retailers. In 1997 Leegin instituted a retail pricing and promotion policy to sell goods only to speciality stores that offered customers "quality merchandise and a superior service". As part of that policy, Leegin refused to sell to retailers that discounted goods below Leegin's suggested resale prices. Their reasoning was that discounting harmed Leegin's brand image and reputation. When PSKS refused to cease discounting Leegin's products, Leegin refused to continue supplying their products to the store.

In the District Court, PSKS successfully claimed that Leegin had violated the Sherman Act by "entering into agreements with retailers to charge only those prices fixed by Leegin". On appeal, Leegin did not dispute that it had entered into RPM agreements, but contended that a "rule of reason" analysis should apply, and that under this analysis, Leegin's marketing policy had no anti-competitive effects. Leegin argued that it was important to distinguish between restraints with anti-competitive effects that are harmful to consumers and those with procompetitive effects that are in the consumer's best interests (or have no effect on competition).

The Court of Appeals, however, rejected the argument that a rule of reason approach should be adopted, and refused to consider the testimony of Leegin's economic expert (as had the District Court) on the basis that it was bound by Dr Miles, and the per se rule rendered all justifications for RPM irrelevant.

The Supreme Court majority judgment

The majority of the Supreme Court in Leegin noted that "it cannot be stated with any degree of confidence that resale price maintenance always or almost always tend[s] to restrict competition and decrease output".3 Instead, they held that the potential economic effects of RPM agreements should be examined to see whether the per se rule was in fact appropriate. As part of this process, the majority reached the following conclusions:

  • The per se rule should not be adopted for administrative convenience alone; doing so may have the effect of prohibiting pro-competitive conduct that anti-trust laws should encourage as RPM agreements can have either proor anti- competitive effects, depending on the circumstances in which they are formed;
  • The per se rule should not be justified only by the possibility of higher prices to the consumer if no other anti-competitive conduct or effect is found;
  • Permitting a manufacturer to control resale prices may promote inter-brand competition and consumer welfare in a variety of ways; and
  • Absent RPM agreements, retail services that enhance inter-brand competition might be underprovided because discounting retailers would be able to "free ride" on the efforts of retailers who furnish such services by capturing some of the demand those services generate, without having to fund them.

In considering reasons why the per se rule should remain, the majority recognised the risk that RPM agreements may have anti-competitive effects, including that they might:

  • Result in unlawful price fixing designed solely to obtain monopoly profits;
  • Facilitate manufacturer or retailer cartels; and/or
  • Discourage a manufacturer from cutting prices to retailers.

However, given the diversity of effects, the majority considered that the better position was that a rule of reason rather than a per se approach is warranted, and accordingly, ruled that the Dr Miles decision was no longer good law.

The New Zealand position compared to Leegin

If New Zealand does adopt a clearance process for restrictive trade practices (as discussed above), this would put us somewhere between the US position before and after Leegin. This may be a preferable position to be in if the pro-competitive effects of resale price maintenance are to be recognised and accepted, while still safe guarding against the possibility of anticompetitive effects. It would certainly allow the underlying economic and commercial rationale for such conduct to be explored, which can only be a good thing. These factors were clearly in the minds of the majority on the Supreme Court.

As noted in our previous Alert, submissions on the Ministry of Economic Development's review of Part V close on Friday 10 August 2007.

News flash:

In June 2007 Deborah Battell was appointed Director, Competition Branch of the Commerce Commission. Deborah has been the head of the Fair Trading Branch since June 2001, overseeing in her tenure a number of high profile investigations and prosecutions.


1. 06-480, 551 U.S. (3/26/07) Roberts CJ, Scalia, Thomas and Alito JJ for the majority. Breyer, Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg JJ dissenting. Judgment available at:

2. Dr Miles Medical Co. v John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U.S. 373 (1911).

3. ibid n1, in the Majority opinion at pp 14 - 19.



The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

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”

Related Topics
Related Articles
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
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions