-
Mere puffery vs misleading and deceptive conduct – where is the line?
In the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54 (ACCC v TPG), the High Court of Australia (High Court) drew a distinction between mere puffery and representations with the intention of marketing. This article explores the decision in ACCC v TPG and the distinction between puffery and…
-
Overview of the Unfair Trading Practices Bill 2026
On 1 April 2026, the Australian Government introduced the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 (Cth) (Bill) to amend the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) and Australian Consumer Law (ACL).[1] If passed, the reform will take effect on 1 July 2027. The Bill’s amendments aim to protect consumers from manipulative…
-
ACCC publishes guidance on cash acceptance industry codes
From 1 January 2026, new cash acceptance obligations have commenced under industry codes applying to supermarkets and fuel retailers, overseen by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). In March 2026, the ACCC published guidance on these newly enforced regulations, reminding retailers to consider their obligations before penalties apply on 1 July 2026.
-
Cancellation of shares held to be oppressive
Shareholder oppression occurs when those who control a company use their power in a way that unfairly harms or takes advantage of other (usually minority) shareholders. The Federal Court case of Sharif v Vitruvian Investments PL (No 3) [2023] FCA 920 (Vitruvian Investments) involved a shareholder oppression dispute between Mr Walid Sharif (Mr Sharif/Plaintiff) and…
-
False and misleading representations – sections 29(1)(a)-(n) ACL
Where a business strays beyond mere “sales puffery” in promoting its goods or services and “crosses the line” in to the realm of deception, depending on the nature of the statements sections 29(1)(a)-(n) of Schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (ACL) may be able to be used as a sword to…
-
Skincare brand Biologi breached the ACL – ordered to publish 5 corrective notices
In a recent decision of the Federal Court in Native Extracts Pty Ltd v Plant Extracts Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1265 Downes J issued an initial judgement and made orders for declaratory relief and the publication of eight (8) corrective notices by Plant Extracts Pty Ltd ACN 613 551 349 (Plant Extracts) and skincare brand…
-
Misleading and deceptive conduct – Invisalign v SmileDirectClub
The case of Invisalign Australia Pty Limited v SmileDirectClub LLC [2023] FCA 395 (Invisalign v SDC) involved two (2) companies that offer what’s referred to as the “clear aligner teeth straightening treatment” (Clear Aligner). On 23 December 2021, Invisalign Australia Pty Limited (Invisalign) commenced proceedings against SmileDirectClub Australia Pty Ltd and its US parent company…
-
Use of a competitors trade marks for comparative advertising
Comparative advertising can be a powerful tool, but it must be done within the bounds of the law. Learn more about the legal implications of comparative advertising in Australia, including the case of GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1.
-
Changes to monetary threshold for consumer contracts
Businesses have consumer guarantee protections to consider, with the threshold for contracts subject to Australian Consumer Law increasing from $40,000 to $100,000. Find out what changes you need to make to stay compliant with the law, as of 1 July 2021.
Australian Consumer Law
Make an enquiry
