mergers and business acquisitions

Employsure’s Google Ads found to mislead businesses

HomePrivate: BlogLegal insightsEmploysure’s Google Ads found to mislead businesses

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

The Full Federal Court, in the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Employsure Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 142, unanimously upheld the appeal by the ACCC regarding a number of Google Ads, posted by Employsure Pty Ltd (Employsure) – a workplace relations advisory company) between August 2016 and August 2018.

Statutory framework

The Australian Consumer Law (ACL) is contained within Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)Section 18 provides:

18 Misleading or deceptive conduct

  • A person must not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.”

It follows from section 18 that, before a Court will make a finding of misleading or deceptive conduct, it must be seen that a person, in trade or commerce, engaged in conduct that is misleading or deceptive.

There are four (4) elements to be satisfied in such an action.  Misleading and deceptive conduct is the critical element and has been described, in McWilliam’s Wines Pty Ltd v McDonald’s System of Australia Pty Ltd (1980) 33 ALR 394 at 411 as: “… to be read as meaning “may mislead or deceive” or “may be expected to mislead or deceive” or “has a capacity or tendency to mislead or deceive. [emphasis added].

Section 29 in Schedule 2 of the ACL prohibits false or misleading representations about goods or services and provides:

29 False or misleading representations about goods or services

  • A person must not, in trade or commerce, in connection with the supply or possible supply of goods or services or in connection with the promotion by any means of the supply or use of goods or services:

(b) make a false of misleading representation that services are of a particular standard, quality, value or grade; or

(h) make a false or misleading representation that the person making the representation has a sponsorship, approval or affiliation.”

Misleading advertisements

Employsure purchased Google Ads featuring several headlines, such as ‘Fair Work Ombudsman Help – Free 24/7 Employer Advice’ and ‘Fair Work Commission Advice – Free Employer Advice’.   The SEO optimisation of the ads were designed to in response to search terms such as ‘fair work ombudsman’ and ‘fair work Australia helpline’.  Employsure also advertised call centre contact numbers for a ‘Helpline’ providing free advice regarding to employment relations on its websites.

Relief provided

The Court, saw fit to provide declaratory relief and remit the proceeding to the primary judge for hearing as to the injunctive relief sought.  The declaratory relief, as sought by the ACCC, saw the Full Court declare that Employsure:

  • engaged in conduct, which was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive, in contravention of s 18(1) of the Australian Consumer Law in Schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth); and
  • made false or misleading representations that:
    • its services are of a particular standard or quality in contravention of section 29(1)(b) of the ACL; and
    • it has government sponsorship or approval in contravention of section 29(1)(h) of the ACL.

Links and further references

Legislation

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)

Cases

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Employsure Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 142

McWilliam’s Wines Pty Ltd v McDonald’s System of Australia Pty Ltd (1980) 33 ALR 394

Further information on misleading and deceptive conduct

If you need advice on misleading and deceptive conduct, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about misleading and deceptive conduct

  • Tortious contract interference – injunctive relief

    Tortious contract interference – injunctive relief

    The wrongful or “tortious” interference with a contract occurs when a third party intentionally causes a contracting party to commit a breach of contract.  The third party will be liable if they intentionally induced or disrupted a party’s ability to perform the terms of a binding contract.  Remedies for tortious interference are available to ensure…

    Read more …

  • Use of confidential information – the springboard injunction

    Use of confidential information – the springboard injunction

    This article examines the UK decision of Forse & ors v Secarma Ltd & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 215, which discussed the legal concept of a springboard injunction, and its implications in Australia. The Court must consider similar principles to determine if an injunction should be granted.

    Read more …

  • Employsure’s Google Ads found to mislead businesses

    Employsure’s Google Ads found to mislead businesses

    The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s (ACCC) appeal against Employsure Pty Ltd has been upheld by the Full Federal Court. Find out what this means for Australian consumers and businesses and how it could affect the future of consumer law.

    Read more …

  • Injunction sought for breach of confidence

    Injunction sought for breach of confidence

    Dundas Lawyers helped a corporate client protect their confidential information and copyright material from a former employee and contractor. Read the full article to learn how they used detailed work and a chronology to secure justice for their client.

    Read more …

  • Interlocutory injunctions and damages undertakings

    Interlocutory injunctions and damages undertakings

    An interlocutory injunction may be sought by a patent owner to stop a defendant from infringing their patent. This article examines the two elements that must be established by an Applicant and the considerations the Court will take into account when making its decision.

    Read more …

  • The tort of injurious falsehood explained

    The tort of injurious falsehood explained

    Injurious falsehood is a tort which arises when false representations are made about a person or company, leading to damage. This article examines the key elements of the tort, including malice and actual loss, and looks at case law to explain them.

    Read more …

  • Shareholders’ agreements & deadlock clauses

    Shareholders’ agreements & deadlock clauses

    Deadlock Clauses in Shareholders’ Agreements can prevent shareholder oppression. Learn about different types of clauses, dispute resolution provisions and financial implications. Read on to find out more.

    Read more …

  • s115A Copyright Act – infringement outside Australia

    s115A Copyright Act – infringement outside Australia

    This article examines the concept of shareholder oppression and provides examples of when the Court has found oppressive conduct, as well as when it has not. It also outlines the remedies the Court prefers when faced with oppressive conduct.

    Read more …

  • Injunctions granted for breach of confidence

    Injunctions granted for breach of confidence

    Court denied injunction due to lack of precision in describing confidential info. Businesses should review procedures to ensure secure info.

    Read more …


Posted

in

Send this to a friend