Dundas Lawyers® recognises the importance of businesses embracing technology and the internet, as more and more customers are looking online to make purchases. Our team advises on compliance with the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) and offer services such as drafting various agreements and contract relevant to your online business’s operations.
Why choose Dundas Lawyers®?
Having exerted Blood Sweat and Years® since April 2010 we are the team you want on your side for the long term to act as the ‘bodyguard’ for your online business. Some of the reasons clients choose Dundas Lawyers® include:
- our Uncommon business acumen;
- our Uncommon expertise in transactional, compliance and litigious matters;
- our Uncommon expertise forensic case preparation;
- our Uncommon customer focus;
- the fact that we don’t just know law, we know business!
- how we leverage our Uncommon Nous® to provide client centric solutions.
Considering getting a lawyer to advise your business?
For a confidential, no obligation initial telephone call to find out how we can help your online business gain an uncommon advantage, please phone our team on either 1300 386 529 or 07 3221 0013.
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Legislation
Recent insights for online businesses
-
New Anti-Money Laundering Bill
On 11 September 2024 the (Bill) was introduced to the House of Representatives.[1] The Bill will amend the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) (AML/CTF Act) to include provisions regarding deterrence, detection and disruption of money laundering and terrorism financing.[2] Most changes will take effect from 31 March 2026. Read more
-
Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses
Justice Burley of the Federal Court of Australia in the case of Siemens Industry Software Inc v Telstra Corporation Limited [2020] FCA 901 ordered that Telstra, within fourteen (14) days, provide to Siemens all documents in its control relating to the identity of certain Telstra Account holders. Those account holders were suspected by Siemens of… Read more
-
Is social media chat log a document in Federal Court?
The Federal Court has addressed the hearsay rule exception of using a log from an instant messaging platform to prove the identity of the sender, date, time of the message, and contents of the statement. Read more
-
Businesses obligations when trading online – CC Act 2010 (Cth)
This article provides an overview of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and its application to online sales, including provisions relating to misleading conduct, single price representation, unconscionable conduct, unfair contract terms and remedies for contraventions. Read more
-
ACCC guidance for online user reviews
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has released guidelines to help businesses navigate the complexities of online reviews. Learn how to manage reviews, remove fake ones, and stay compliant with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). Read on to find out more. Read more
-
Businesses’ obligations when trading online – Competition and Consumer Act 2010
The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) provides legal remedies for those aggrieved by a business’s online conduct, such as penalties, damages, etc. This article explores remedies for misleading, deceptive, unconscionable conduct and unfair contract terms. Read more
Recent Federal Court decisions regarding online businesses
-
FanFirm Pty Limited v Fanatics, LLC [2024] FCA 764
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – trade marks – alleged infringement of registered marks under s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – deceptive similarity – misleading or deceptive conduct – alleged breaches of s 18 and s 29(1)(g) and (h) of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) – tort of passing off. TRADE MARKS – infringement…
-
Comite Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne v Network Nutrition Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 780
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – costs – appeal from decision of Registrar of Trade Marks – where proceeding resolved on the eve of final hearing – where agreed resolution involved the appellants discontinuing the proceeding – where the parties did not reach agreement on costs – where each party sought its costs of the proceeding –…
-
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v PayPal Australia Pty Limited [2024] FCA 762
CORPORATIONS – unfair contract terms – where the respondent included a term to the effect that the user of its services had 60 days to notify the respondent in writing of any fee error and that, if the user did not notify the respondent within that time, the respondent would have no obligation to correct…
