Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Energy Watch Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 425 Citation: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Energy Watch Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 425
Parties: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v ENERGY WATCH PTY LTD (ACN 135 183 372) and BENJAMIN HEINRICH POLIS
File number: VID 930 of 2011
Judge: MARSHALL J
Date of judgment: 30 April 2012
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – misleading and deceptive conduct – advertising – breach of Australian Consumer Law ss 18(1), 29(1)(g), 34 – whether representations were made – whether representations were false, misleading or deceptive – whether qualifying information sufficiently clear and prominent
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Schedule 2 ss 18(1), 29(1)(g), 34 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 52, 53(c), 55A Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 140
Cases cited: Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Campomar Sociedad, Limitada v Nike International Ltd (2000) 202 CLR 45 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1254 Fair Work Ombudsman v Maclean Bay Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 10 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 1177 Qantas Airways Ltd v Gama (2008) 167 FCR 537 Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energiser Australia Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 223 ACCC v Harris Scarfe Australia Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 54 Westpac Banking Corporation v Northern Metals Pty Ltd (1989) 14 IPR 499
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate