infoJustice

Abstract: In Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 113 the ACCC alleged that Pfizer’s ‘Project LEAP’ involved a scheme to lock pharmacists into substituting its generic version of the high sales volume anti-cholesterol drug patent-expired Atorvastatin (Lipitor) which took advantage of a substantial degree of market power for a purpose proscribed by s 46(1)(c) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). The ACCC also claimed that Pfizer’s actions constituted a course of exclusive dealing pursuant to s 47(1)(d) and (e) for the proscribed purpose of lessening competition. Flick J in the Federal Court of Australia in a judgment heavy with quotations but sparse in reasoning, dismissed the ACCC’s Amended Originating Application alleging abuse of market power and ordered the ACCC to pay Pfizer’s costs. This column explores that case in the context of Pfizer’s broader strategies to preserve its income globally from this high sales volume drug.