The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has raised concerns regarding Qube Holdings’ planned acquisition of the Melbourne International RoRo and Auto Terminal, citing potential threats to competition in the automotive delivery supply chain at the Port of Melbourne. According to Reuters, Qube, Australia’s largest integrated terminal and freight logistics provider, announced the A$332.5 million ($220.61 million) deal in May 2024. The move would strengthen Qube’s position in the market, but the ACCC warns it may also limit competition in downstream services.
“If this transaction goes ahead, Qube would be operating the terminal while also being in active competition with other automotive stevedores or pre-delivery inspection (PDI) service providers,” ACCC commissioner Philip Williams stated, per Reuters. The regulator expressed concerns that Qube could gain an unfair advantage by controlling access to the terminal, potentially raising costs for competitors or reducing the quality of services offered at the port.
Read more: Australia’s Car Industry Presses ACCC to Focus on Electric Vehicles
In addition to fears over price hikes and restricted access, the ACCC also pointed out the risk of Qube obtaining commercially sensitive information from rivals, which could further distort market competition. The watchdog emphasized that such a deal could undermine fair competition in one of Australia’s critical automotive supply chain hubs.
Qube, however, defended the acquisition. In a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), the company highlighted its previous experience operating the Melbourne RoRo terminal through its subsidiary, Australian Amalgamated Terminals (AAT). The unit managed the terminal from 2002 until its lease expired in 2017. Qube assured that AAT operates its facilities under ACCC oversight and maintains a solid track record of compliance.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand