Laws of Bangladesh

The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970

( Ordinance NO. V OF 1970 )

Chapter II


Unreasonably restrictive trade practices
6. (1) Unreasonably restrictive trade practices shall be deemed to have been resorted to or continued if there is any agreement-
(a) between actual or potential competitors for the purpose or having the effect of-
(i) fixing the purchase or selling prices or imposing any other restrictive trading conditions with regard to the sale or distribution of any goods or the provision of any services;
(ii) dividing or sharing of markets for any goods or services;
(iii) limiting the quantity or the means of production, distribution or sale regard to any goods or the manner or means of providing any services;
(iv) limiting technical development or investment with regard to the production, distribution or sale of any goods or the provision of services;
(v) excluding by means of boycott any other person or undertaking from the production, distribution or sale of any goods or the provision of any services;
(b) between a supplier and a dealer of goods fixing minimum resale prices, including-
(i) an agreement with a condition for the sale of goods by a supplier to a dealer which purports to establish or provide for the minimum prices to be charged on the resale of the goods in Bangladesh; or
(ii) an agreement which requires as a condition of supplying goods to a dealer to the making of any such agreement;
(c) which subjects the making of any agreement to the acceptance by suppliers or buyers of additional goods or services which are not, by their nature or by the custom of the trade, related to the subject matter of such agreement.
(2) No such agreement as is referred to in sub-section (1) shall be deemed to constitute an unreasonably restrictive trade practice if it is shown-
(a) that it contributes substantially to the efficiency of the production or distribution of goods or of the provision of
services or to the promotion of technical progress or export of goods;
(b) that such efficiency or promotion could not reasonably have been achieved by means less restrictive of competition; and
(c) that the benefits from such efficiency or promotion clearly outweigh the adverse effect of the absence or lessening of competition.

Copyright © 2019, Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division
Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs