original corporation also possesses that market power. Hence, for the purpose
of ascertaining an original corporation’s market power, related corporations
are taken to be part of the original corporation. In other words, reference to a
‘corporation’ includes for these purposes references to ‘related corporations.’
Structure
Definitions have some basic structures which need to be understood.
Sometimes just the basic structure is used while at other times there are
combinations, adaptations and variations.
Repetition of a Term
A definition may repeat one or more of the terms which it defines. Such a
definition is in the form a + b = a + x + y. It is clear from this that the repeated
term, here “a,” is not defined. It is on both sides of the equation portrayed by
the definition. Hence the definition is effectively b = x + y.
An example is the definition of “document of an agency” in s4(1) of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth). “Document of an agency” is defined
to mean “a document in the possession of an agency whether created in the
agency or received in the agency”. Two provisions in the term “document of
an agency” - “document” and “agency” - are repeated in the definition. Hence
the definition is only defining the term “of”. Given that there is already a
“document” and an “agency,” it tells us when the document is a document of
an agency. This is when the document is “in the possession of” the agency.
Thus the basic meaning of “of” is “in the possession of”. The definition adds,
by way of reassurance, that this is the case “whether [the document is] created
in the agency or received in the agency”.
Equality between Two Sets of Terms
In the simple case of an equating definition one term is equated with another.
This definition takes the form a = x. It is a ‘means’ definition. For example, in
s4(1) of the Freedom
of Information Act 1982
(Cth) “request” is defined in
the following way: “‘request’ means an application made in accordance with
section 15(1)”.
However, there can be a statement of equality between two sets of terms. This
definition is in the form a + b
= x + y. With this type of definition there can
sometimes be a functional connection between the components of the
expression defined and the components of the definition. This enables us on
those occasions, but with a limited degree of confidence, to treat the definition
as a definition of the components. In this case the definition is in the form a +
b = x + y where a, b, x and y are such that we can say, although tentatively,
that a = x and b = y.
 |
 |
 |